David Brockington's Tasting Notebook

Blue Ridge Porter

Initial Impressions:

This is yet another beer that I obtained on my trip to the mid- Atlantic region in December of 1994. My local companions warned me against Blue Ridge, but I generally disregard such rational advice. I picked up several Blue Ridge products, but only got around to reviewing two before the others exceeded the "best if consumed by" date. I suspect that my experience with both this Porter and the Amber Lager left me without enthusiasm for the other Blue Ridge beers in my fridge.

The first thing I noticed about my bottle of the porter was a tell-tale ring around the neck of the bottle. As homebrewers know, this can have several implications, such as priming with malt extract (or honey, even) or a bacterial infection. Obviously, commercial breweries do not "prime" their bottled product, leaving me to warily speculate as to the stability of this beer.

Pouring the beer into my Blue Ridge mug proved a chore. This Porter was excessively carbonated to the point where I could only get about half of product into my glass. When the foam settled, the beer proved to be a dark amber or light brown, with decent clarity, and it displayed a tan head with good retention properties.

Nose:

Roasty notes and a slight maltiness were evident in the nose. A cloying, objectionable aroma was also present.

Flavor:

A slight maltiness initiated the tasting experience, which was followed by a disturbing lactic acidity. Hop flavor followed the acidic note. The finish was dominated by a lingering roasty astringency.

Final Analysis:

The underlying beer is a decent brown porter. Unfortunately, two distinct flaws work against this beer. The first, and most evident, is the obvious infection that it experienced at some point in its life, an infection which either started or grew rapidly (or both) while the beer was in the bottle. The evidence of this infection is damning: the ring around the neck of the bottle, the high degree of carbonation, and the lactic note in the flavor profile. The second flaw is the roasty astringency in the finish, which may be a function of the infection, but may also represent a separate, procedural flaw of its own.

I imagine that an uninfected sample of this beer is a credible brown porter. For a decent brown porter, this bottle would have had to lose the infection (obviously) and the roasty notes would have to be toned down quite a bit. As it didn't position itself specifically as a "brown porter" (and how many commercial porters do?) I can not ding the beer for a roasty note, but the astringency does detract.

Rating: *1/2

(5-star scale)

Next Up:

Blue Ridge Amber Lager
Saxer Liberator Doppelbock
Oasis Nileator Doppelbock
Star IPA

Postscript

Two days after posting this review to rec.food.drink.beer, I found a bottle of the Porter in my fridge. It was the remaining bottle from a BAA shipment, and it was a month past its "best-by" date. A dialogue with Cameron Majidi in rec.food.drink.beer convinced me to give Blue Ridge Porter a second chance when the opportunity presented itself.

Although the new sample was past its freshness date, it showed neither a sign of infection nor a sign of oxidation. It was slightly malty, well balanced between the hop and malt, and a nice chocolately profile, but not too heavy. Again, however, I noted a roasty/astringent note, which did detract from the beer. The description of this beer which appears on the neck of the bottle implicitly positioned the beer as a brown porter, and such a roasty astringency ought not be in such a beer. That aside, it was a much better glass of beer than that reviewed previously.

Revised Rating: **1/2

I will retain both ratings. While the Porter is a good beer when it is on, a question remains as to the consistency of Blue Ridge products.
Copyright 1995 by David Brockington, all rights reserved.
Seattle

Comments? Fire off some email:

dbrock@u.washington.edu
[Back] Return to Notebook Contents Page