Real Ale v Lager

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 04:21 PM

Damn you, Ingham - I was on a roll of centuries then!

You know what though - In some ways I agree with you. All the real ale I got in the US from at least half a dozen different micro-breweries was absolutely top class. There is stuff here that equals or beats it but there is an awful lot of bilgewater served up as real ale as well:-( I think that because it is a relatively new 'real ale' market there people realy do care more than some of the established brewers here.

Where I disagree is that in the main the US 'domestic' beer is not as good as the ordinary beer here. Even the worst that Scottish and Newcastle can throw at is usualy better than Bud or Miller. One I did enjoy oddly enough was Blue Ribbon (Pasche?) But then again I upset the CAMRA guys here by alternating my pints of old bishops scrotum with Carling black label.

:D (tG)

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Kenneth Ingham
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 04:38 PM

Back in the '70s when I belonged to CAMRA there were very few pubs selling cask conditioned beer - but by heck the quality in all of them was first class. It seems that from the mid 80s onward every tom, dick & harry of a landlord has jumped on the "real ale" bandwagon and the quality in general has plummeted. Youngs Brewery would not supply beer unless the recipient had a cellerman certificate to proove that they knew how to handle their beer.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 05:09 PM

Spot on, Kenneth. The worst effect has been the small independants falling for the promises of the big boys who are paying lip service to Real Ale - Look at Boddingtons as a point of fact. Sold out to Whitbread for bigger profits, started to make crap beer. Now closed down. Thanks heavens Holts have the covenant to give lots of money to cancer research:-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 02 Aug 06 - 07:31 PM

Well, I asked a fellow session player tonight. He is a microbiologist who has experience with commercial brewing processes, and is also a keen home brewer as well as one for a good "nose" for a pint he likes.

I'd say to my surprise, he does come down in favour of the steralising/filtering or whatever processes and does think there is a certain amount of myth about the real ales.

One thing he did stress though is if you are really talking about an ale with live yeast, you need a good cellarman - a point raised by others. That, in line with what someone else indicated, adverse processes start happening, etc.

Sorry it's all a bit vague but when this person gets going on a conversation, it can take me a week or more for bits to sink in.

For now, I'm just reporting back and saying perhaps it is not all quite as cut and dried as at least I thought...

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Folkiedave
Date: 03 Aug 06 - 06:14 AM

I am not sure that anyone over thought it was "easy". I know decent landlords that have sent beer back to breweries, rather than serve crap - and the breweries accept it.

Eurofizz is lowest common denominator - it is designed to appeal to the largest number of people. It takes nothing to look after a sealed metal dustbin. IMHO the same landlords that are found of sealed metal dustbins are less likely to clean their pipes and generally go for a high quality of hygiene essential for decent beer.

I also like the Aerican "craft" beers (In Oregon where there are loads of micro-breweries) but they are pasteurized and filtered. And rarely below 5% - hardly a "session" beer, in either sense of the word.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST,Moby Duck
Date: 03 Aug 06 - 11:18 AM

I don't know why people keep referring to Lager as "fizz" "chilled" as if that makes it bad. I personally cant stand warm flat beer. So what!

But I can't understand how people can drink some of the cloudy evil smelling stuff that I've seen poured in real ale pubs. And bloody hell have you ever been to the bog/mens room after a bearded ale drinker Phhhhhhew!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: bob dylan
Date: 03 Aug 06 - 11:31 AM

I like a cold lager. You limeys drink horrible brown smelly slop called ale yurchh!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Folkiedave
Date: 03 Aug 06 - 03:03 PM

You limeys drink horrible brown smelly slop called ale yurchh!

And you Americans will drink anything - including gnat's piss.

And it is served cold so you can't taste what crap it really is.

But I defend your right to drink whatever garbage people are prepared to serve you and you are prepared to spend good money buying.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: melodeon king
Date: 03 Aug 06 - 04:01 PM

I love a pint of youngs bitter!
I love a pint of Ruddles County
I love a pint of Fosters lager
I love a pint of cider
Variety my children that's what life's about.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Folkiedave
Date: 03 Aug 06 - 08:13 PM

I love a pint of youngs bitter!
I love a pint of Ruddles County
I love a pint of Fosters lager
I love a pint of cider
Variety my children that's what life's about"

With you all the way there.

Except for the Foster's. Brewed under licence. Always a give-away.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Slag
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 01:04 AM

Flat warm beer?? What's the point? Maybe something mulled in the dead of winter but that is about it. You'd have to live in the most god-awful hole on the planet, be wrapped in cold fog and eternal dinginess, breathing mold spores constantly in order to like uh , warm uh, uh flat uh uh,    oh!.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Terry K
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 06:21 AM

I find that most so-called "real ales" are far too strong to appeal to real drinkers. Good session beer of less than 4% is a thing of the past, so if you want "a good drink" you end up with Adnams, London Pride, CBB etc, all of which are around 4.3%, which generally means not feeling all that bright the next day. Hence I go on to lager if it's going to be a heavy session.

It also seems to me that the people who have the most huff 'n puff to say about real ales are the ones who sip their way through a pint in an hour and a half and then leave an inch in the bottom and go home, braging to all their mates about what a drunken blast they had at the weekend. I could go on to mention that most of the bollocks talked about Guinness is talked by those who rarely drink the stuff, but I won't.

One thing I will say - if you can drink instant coffee you really should not really be commenting on matters of taste ........

cheers, Terry

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 07:10 AM

Adnams "The Bitter" = 3.7%
Fosters Larger = 4%
Adnams "Broadside" = 4.7%
Budweiser Abv 5%
Stella Artois = 5.1%

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 10:21 AM

Manns brown ale - 2.8% abv
Robinsons Mild - 3.3% abv
Carling black label - 4.0% abv

Know what you mean about instant coffee though. Yuck. Starting to feel the same about standard teas (Typhoo, PG etc.)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Bill D
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 10:48 AM

" I go on to lager if it's going to be a heavy session."

???...you mean the point is to be able to drink steadily for hours, no matter the flavor?

To each his own, I suppose, but I will choose my brews for their taste, even if it means no more than 2-3 in an evening. I grew up in an area (middle US) where beer in a pub/bar was 3.2%, and I thought for years that I didn't really like beer...then I found real beer/ale....German, Belgian, English...etc, and was in heaven...and now I can get very good beer in the US. Sadly, very few lagers are among them...(exception noted above)

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 12:00 PM

What has always fascinated me is the fact that, prior to Prohibitiom, American mass-produced beers were winning more than their share of international awards. After Repeal, something happened. I can't believe that our brewmeisters became suddenly incompetent; obviously American tastes changed over that brief period. But why....?

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 01:36 PM

You can't call American brewers incompetent based on the tastes of a few large brands. American brewers, notably the microbrews, are creating some of the most interesting beers IN THE WORLD. They are winning awards again, internationally.

Before Prohibition, most beer was brewed locally because it was more difficult to ship.   Refrigeration, canning, and bottling improved along with the Repeal and it became possible for beer to be shipped greater distance. The brewers realized that "local tastes" would not be the same from region to region and the recipe for the product altered to make it more appealing to greater numbers.   As the larger brewers began to sell their product the tastebuds changed.   Local brewers would be forced to change their product to compete.   Soon, most beers began to taste the same.   By the 1980's, there were far fewer local brewers but the microbrew renaissance began.

Terry K mentions session drinking, and the note seems to perpetuate a stereotype that drinkers brag about getting drunk. Fans of good beer do not drink to get drunk, they enjoy the taste and the pleasant glow. They may not finish 4 beers in an hour, but I will bet that one beer will be remembered far longer.

It is a chicken vs. egg scenario when trying to determine who changed the taste - the brewers or the tastebuds of consumers. If it did not sell, people would not buy it.

There is still a snobbish appeal to beer. Blue collar consumers will stick with the blander beer, mainly because it is cheaper. Also, it is easier to get a quick buzz on a sixpack of Bud or Miller. Because it is bland and cold, it goes down easy and fast.   The tastier beers take longer to enjoy.   You won't chug a Sam Adams.    I've never seen anyone make a beer bong using Belgian Ale.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 01:48 PM

Well Bill, I can understand someone looking for a drink of lower abv if it is going to be a long night. I know I for one am not very good at making a pint last, epsecially if I'm playing in a session....

As Dave the gnome and I have shown that choice needn't be larger though and there is a fair variation in strength between both drinks. Most pubs I go to round here these days offer a minimum of 2 bitters, typically with 2, one somewhere around the 4% mark and one around the 5% mark.

Dick, if it's anything like the UK, I would guess the name of the game with the mass produced stuff has become to produce a drink that is not unpleasant to taste for the greatest number of people, taking out any possible character in the process.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 02:13 PM

Was writing while you posted, Ron. Thanks for the explanation.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Slag
Date: 13 Aug 06 - 02:18 PM

How old are you TerryK? The only people I know who drink to get drunk are pre-legal aged teenagers (THEY like to brag) and poor unfortunate alcoholics who can't help themselves. I seldom ( once a year, if that) go to a bar or pub and never have more than two of anything and if I'm driving, one or none). I like ale and microbrews because of the taste and refreshment. I admire the complexity of flavors, texture and temperature and hopefully, the aftertaste. I'd forego the alcohol altogether but it too, contributes much to the flavor.

Do you eat to see how much you can eat? Brag about it?

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 04:17 AM

Terry K, " most real ales are too strong to appeal to real drinkers "
what planet are you from ? you'll be telling us next that whisky is too strong a spirit for real men.

eric

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Paul Burke
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 05:03 AM

What are you on about Terry K? Real ale isn't just falling over fluid. It comes in all strengths- here's a nice range from Abbeydale as served at the Three Stags. I generally stick to the Matins.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Bill D
Date: 14 Aug 06 - 12:22 PM

Oh, I wish some place like Abbeydale were available close to me! Those folks have the right attitude!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Slag
Date: 15 Aug 06 - 04:26 AM

To the toast, gentlemen!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST,Abbot
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:15 AM

What is best then?

My mate tells me lager is best and that you lot need your taste budz examined!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:19 AM

Try for yourself. Why believe what other people tell you?

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:39 AM

Lager is only suitable for irrigating a bunch Vikings STD ridden urethras, or clearing out kidney stones. Real Ale tastes good, is dark,carries a frothy foam head down the glass, and smells like beer should with a pleasant aroma. Lager looks like urine smells like urine and causes urine; and Europeans have to put lime in it to give it flavour.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 06:51 AM

Bit unfair, Dave (tam), on good brews like Leffe, Bitburger and Jenlain but I can see where you are coming from:-) Perhaps if the English stick to bitters and milds, leaving our European cousins to the lagers, we would not get such abominations as Skol and Carling!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 08:04 AM

I didn't think Leffe was a lager.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: manitas_at_work
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 08:07 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leffe

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 08:18 AM

From another site (Brew like a monk)

"Nonetheless, Leffe grabbed a bronze medal as a lager in the recently judged Brewing Industry International Awards in Munich. This is one of the most esteemed international competitions."

It is the fermenation temperature and type of yeast (top or bottom fermenting) that determines the 'lager' title. I believe Leffe is fermented for 2 weeks which, although shorter than some lagers, is considerably longer than most beers.

So I hold up my hands - I don't know which it is realy!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Aug 06 - 07:37 PM

Half the time you would not know what you were drinking

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 12:10 PM

BARLEY - "Which any fool can eat, but for which the good Lord intended a more divine means of consumption. Let us give thanks and praise His bounty by brewing beer." -- attr. Friar Tuck, 1196 A.D.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 12:43 PM

"Lager looks like urine smells like urine and causes urine; and Europeans have to put lime in it to give it flavour."

Europeans don't know their ass from their elbow if they believe that crap.   That is just another example of ignorance and the fact that they were suckered into believing elist snobs commercial campaigns.

There are good lagers and there are bad lagers. There are good ales and there are bad ales. ALL of it is beer. If your taste buds are limited to one style, I pity you.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: GUEST,Historian
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 01:01 PM

Well said Ron.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 01:06 PM

Errrr, Ron, I don't think ANY Europeans believe that. Aside from putting a slice of lemon into Blanche Biers I have never seen anyone adulterate either beer or lager since the ladies used to put lime in lager and blackcurrent in Guiness in the 1960s. Oh - apart from the strange habit that seems to have come across with the Mexican lagers of drinking out of a b0ttle with a wedge of lime stuck in it.

As to they are all beers... Well, it may be so now but originaly Ale was un-hopped. Beer only came into being when hops were added - Originaly as a preservative! The sub-genres of beer now known as ale and lager are just different ways of fermenting and storing.

I, for one, am not limited to one style but I certainly prefer dark beers over pale ones. The scope is vast - From Rodenbach to Manns brown ale. But you are quite right in one thing - There is good and bad in most things and the good should be enjoyed whatever form it takes:-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 01:22 PM

DtG - I am not sure if I agree with you when you say "Beer only came into being when hops were added".   I've never heard that and I would be curious as to the source.

Beer is a generic term which probably derives from a Latin word for drink. As you noted, at one point all beer was unhopped but the addition of the plant did not change the name. There was a type of beer brewed in ancient Egypt. While they did not add hops, they added other plants for flavor.   Germans were the first to start using it, as you mentioned for a preservative. The UK was rather late coming to the table to use hops.   Regardless, all of it can and was labled "beer". Ale may have been a more common term if that was the only style availble in the region, but it was still beer.   Sort of like calling a tissue "Kleenex".

Do you know why they started adding lime to beer?   Here in the U.S., Mexican beer became popular in the late 50's and 60's when surfers in California would travel down to Mexico to buy cheap beer. At the time, Corona was available very cheap. The legend has it that the lime was added either to give it some taste, or in an attempt to keep flies out of the brew!   Somewhere along the line, the cheap Corona's became a bit of a status symbol, and now the crap is served as a premium!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 04:48 PM

There you go , Ron.

You are quite right in saying that hops were not the only addition - In fact it is hops that give beer it's soporiphic quality more that the alcohol. There have been beers brewed with, for instance, the oils of other plants that have just the opposite effect - Including Hemp!

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 05:35 PM

DtG, your use of "ale" and "beer" intrigued me. The link you gave was for another discussion site, and the users did not really give credit to their source, so , I had to dig further!

Apparently, the distinction of "beer" and "ale" is apparently unique to England! You were 100% correct about the addition of hops. Up until about 1300, the English were drinking "ale" - which was an unhopped brew. I doubt if modern drinkers would recognize it though! It

The English were relative latecomers to the hops experience. Hops had been introduced several centuries earlier. Also, in some of the Baltic countries the word for beer is "alus" , in Estonian it is ölu, in Finnish it's olut,the Swedes call it öl, and the Norwegian and Danish word for beer is øl!   

For more information, I would like to direct you to Michael Jackson's website. No, not the pop singer with all the problems, this is Michael Jackson "The Beer Hunter". He has authored several books on beer, hosted a television series, and if you ever have a chance to attend a tasting that he supervises - go for it!! Here is a page on his website that discusses the above - http://www.beerhunter.com/documents/19133-001511.html

Now I am thirsty again!!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Bill D
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 05:48 PM

DtG....Rodenbach..YUM! I haven't had one for years....also BIOS Copper Ale is an 'interesting' Belgian specialty. At one point they plunge a red-hot Copper coil into the wort, which gives a fascinating tang to the brew.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 22 Aug 06 - 06:08 PM

Well as you can guess from my nickname, I've drunk beer all over the world. I love brown ale, mild and bitter from the UK. Amongst the best is Harveys Best Bitter,from Lewis in Sussex; and Tsingtao beer from China.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Aug 06 - 05:08 PM

I guess you would know, Euro...

Anyway. Another interesting point (miss-spelt pint?). I also heard that the clear beers, came originaly from Bohemia because of the fasion for Bohemian crytal drinking vessels. Prior to that beer (or ale!) had been served in Pewter, pot, leather, wood and all sorts of things you couldn't see through. When the crystal tankard came out it was decided that the beer needed to be clear as well, to show off the glass. The first people to achieve this with any sucess were the brewers in Pilsen. So, originaly, Pilsner was a fasion acessory!

Probably complete cobblers but just goes to show what amazing stuff beer is. I could study it all night:-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: woodsie
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 01:07 PM

Ale, Beer, Stout, Lager - I love 'em all!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: bobad
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 03:37 PM

BillD, I must concur with you assessment of Creemore Springs lager, I am sipping my first as I type and I do agree that it is one fine lager. It is rich and full of flavour with a very fine carbonation and creamy head. My only slight, and very minor, quibble is that I find it a tad sweet for my taste - but that is my taste which tends to lean toward a drier quaff suh as Urquel Pilsner.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Bill D
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 04:39 PM

ah..well, then you & I could share a few things, but I DO enjoy that slightly sweeter taste at times. What I REALLY like is the 'sharp' taste of extra hops along with some sweetness.

We wouldn't waste any Creemore Springs, though!

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: bobad
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 04:47 PM

If you get the chance do try John Sleeman's India Pale Ale, it is quite hoppy and full flavoured with a slight kick at 5.3% ABV. Sleeman's brewery has just been bought by Sapporo of Japan so don't know what the future will bring.

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Raedwulf
Date: 24 Aug 06 - 06:37 PM

Brewing with hops was imported from Flanders in the 14thC. Prior to that hops were not used in England as they were believed to promote melancholy (before you get smart, go & look up the medieval theory of humours).

It's not a strict definition, but if you think of ale as non-hopped & beer as hopped, many people, particularly re-enactors, will understand. This is distinct from the term Real Ale (which I hate!), & also distinct from the technical & biological difference between an ale yeast & a lager yeast.

Ere hops, many things were used to bitter beer, but none of them had the preservative qualities of hops. The two that immediately spring to mind are ground ivy (NOT poison!) & alecost (Tanacetum balsamita, IIRC). The latter I have in my garden. It smells very strongly of mint, but imparts a lemony flavour to your brew. No brew, hopped or othrwise, would taste much like anything modern. If you can find & brew (approximately) to a medieval recipe, though, I recommend you do. They're different. Perhaps not to your taste, but try it & see...

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 02:57 AM

Oh ale thou art my darling,
Thou art my joy both night and morning.

Ale, ale beautiful ale,
Served up in pewter it tells it's own tale.

Love it all, eric

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 09:02 AM

Eric, I learnt it as "Oh GOOD ale, thou art my darling" ....which sems particularly apt at the moment!

*G*

Subject: RE: Real Ale v Lager
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 25 Aug 06 - 09:39 AM

Thats it Paul, I got the other one wrong as well, should be ' Glorious ale '

Take all teetotallers, they drinks water neat,
It must rot their gutses, and give 'em damp feet,
But I allus say that a man cannot fail,
On boiled beef and cabbages, and good ENGLISH ALE.

I love it, in fact I think I'll have some t'neet.

eric