Ale or Lager, I'm confused

Which means what? I'm reasonably certain he had very little to do with this idiotic bit of post-Repeal alcoholphobia. Like I always say about A-B, Miller, et al: they got enough to answer for, no need to make shit up.

Reply to
Lew Bryson
Loading thread data ...

You can see it that way if you like. Or you can see it my way.

Reply to
Lew Bryson

cat scratch fever on this dudes c*ck.. he's getting a hardon about HIS point of view. Do yo have a mirror attached to your monitor so you can tell yourself how great you look as you type your elitest responses?

Reply to
Kerry The Liar Loves Waffles

too bad Gew Breyson doesn't give a shit about accuracy.

Reply to
Kerry The Liar Loves Waffles

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 17:55:16 -0500, Steve Jackson wrote (in article ):

Hmmm, I have a buddy that works at Red Star Yeast that's coming back into town. I'll have to pick his brain on that. He has to keep up on all the new info so he should be more up to date than the reference stuff I have. He help me out isolating the Chimay brewing yeast from the bottling yeast.

I agree with the Purity Laws when it comes to using rice malts, just shouldn't be done. Complex sugars from fruit is another story and can be a great addition even in simpler fruit beers. The New Glarus cherry & raspberry are fantastic fruit beers, but are no where near as complex as a lambic.

Reply to
oDDz Bodtkin

Chimay brewing yeast IS the bottling yeast.

There's absolutely no reason not to use rice if that will give you the result you desire.

---------->Denny

Reply to
Denny Conn

I have no objection to the use of rice or any other grain or sugar in beer. It's all in the way it's used. When you use it as 30, 40 percent of the grist (like Budweiser, or similar prortions of corn for Miller or Molson or any other similar beer), then I have a problem with it. But sugar, corn, etc. can be used to great effect in a lot of beers, as any number of Belgian beers (lots of sugar usage in those, especially golden ales like Duvel or Trappist beers) or English beers (frequent use of a bit of corn or sugar in all manners of bitter and other ales) prove regularly.

Agreed that they're nowhere near as complex as lambics, but OTOH, it's intended to be simply a fruit beer. And on that front, they succeed admirably. (As does, just for discussion's sake, one of the most maligned lambics: Lindemann's. Not so great as a lambic; very, very good as a fruit beer.)

-Steve

Reply to
Steve Jackson

"Steve Jackson" schreef in bericht news:VAKXc.107781$Lj.75802@fed1read03... (As does, just for discussion's sake, one of the most maligned

Who gave you that idea? Lindemans lambics are VERY much in demand - not in the least by the blenders... They rank amongst the best, as Girardin, and not that long ago, De Neve. OTOH, I'm not at all that wild from their fruitbeers, even not from the draught unsweetened cherry. JorisP

Reply to
Joris Pattyn

Yeah. Me say: Cuvee Rene. Damned good.

Damn, never had that. Like to try it. Even after that unenthusiastic review.

Reply to
Lew Bryson

Me say: That's the exception that proves the rule. At least as far as what I've seen in the States.

I like the Cassis, as long as I don't think of it as beer.

Reply to
Joel

Its one of my faves of any gueuze.

The cassis just tastes weird to me. But I'll take the framboise, when as you say, I don't think of it as beer.

Now if only beersel and cantillon were sold in KS.

Reply to
Expletive Deleted

Sloppy writing on my part. Many American beer geeks turn their noses up at the Lindeman's fruit lambics. The other lambics are respected, and they are quite good. But the fruit ones often get a bad rap for being too sweet.

-Steve

Reply to
Steve Jackson

DrinksForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.