During our Beer Club meeting in the mountains of North Georgia, Rupesh noticed that we never rated lighter beers, such as lagers, anywhere near as high as darker and more complex beers, like India Pale Ales or Stouts. Some lagers, like baltic porters and dopplebocks such as Samichlaus, are definitely worth our while, but these are a really small percentage of lager sales in the US. Almost every lager sold over here is a Pilsner, and almost every one of those is a macrobrew. Which means they are, by and large, pretty tasteless, and that changes our perception of those lagers out there that aren't.
So anyway, Rupesh's insightful comment got me to thinking. I must admit, my palate tends to favor the dark roasted coffee and chocolate notes of an Oak Aged Yeti or the citrusy bitterness of a 90-minute IPA. And I realize that, even among the rich beers that I just mentioned, I picked an Imperial Stout and a Double IPA. I guess that I crave as much taste as possible crammed in there along with the hops, barley, and water when I drink a beer; and, if that's the case, most lagers, such as the now-ubiquitous American Pilsner, is going to taste like a warm bucket of spit in comparison. And that makes me think that I would only get spit laced with a tinge of metal, or something like that, if I were to pay a couple of bucks more for a premium Pilsner. And my suspicion becomes even stronger since now we know that most American Pilsners are made with rice or corn. (Though that's not necessarily such a bad thing these days; just ask Rogue and that cute little owl-beer called Hitachino. But this isn't the sort of thing Coors is up to.)
However: this article from the New York Times made me think a bit differently about Pils. It starts with the author musing about all the bad lager poured at the ballparks throughout America - and he especially despises the $9 Pabst stand at the new Yankee Stadium (and I would agree, if only because of this book that describes Pabst's amazing but troubling marketing strategy. But damn, aren't they hip and cheap?)
Four years ago, the NYTimes tasted the best Pilsners from around the world, but could only come up with four from American craft brewers that were worth trying. Why so few? One might think, at first, that the daunting prospect of attacking Coors, Miller, Bud and Busch face-on was what pushed craft brewers into Ales. But as Eric Asimov suggests (please, please let him be related to and thus look like this guy, mutton chops and turquoise bolo tie included), the longer and more difficult brewing process of lagers might have played a part in the craft brewer Ale obsession, since lagers need to be brewed at a much lower temperature. Buying lots of fridges and renting lots of space - and, by the way, doubling the fermentation time - doesn't sound appealing to any CFO of a fledgling company.
Yet one other thing probably provided the tipping point: namely, the simple taste of Pilsners. It means that you can't screw up. You have to be dead-on; you can't just throw spices and lots of roasted malts into a brew and cover up any mistakes like you can with most ales. As Asimov writes:
[A]les tend to offer a more complex array of flavors, which can sometimes hide a flaw or unintended note in a beer. Pilsners are stark and exposed, glorious in their lean, pared-down simplicity. They demand disciplined, precision brewing, which can be initially daunting.So, that line of thought made me rethink being a lager-hater. I don't have to think Coors is awesome, but I do have to respect that brewers who make clean, crisp, drinkable Pilsners are doing something technically flawless. It's like appreciating the cook who makes perfect sunny-side up eggs. And I'm cool with that. As Ali G says: Respek.
By the way, Asimov was able to find 18 good American craft Pilsners for this year's taste-test. That's a big increase from only 4 a few years ago. As for the results: Victory Prima Pils came in first, followed by Kaiser Pils from Pennsylvania Brewing (never heard of them before). Maybe we could include some good Pils sometime soon and see if we can taste the flint, or something like that.
We did try one pils up at the Mountain, but everyone hated it.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised you didn't talk about the purpose of beer. Lagers are cheap (they're macro) and you can get a case for $10, which means you can get wasted for $10. It's no mistake that all those beer pong videos look like they were shot in the lounge of your college dorm. You can drink a ton of them, earning you a hangover and bragging rights. For the hipsters it's just cheap (not at new Yankee Stadium, but Williamsburg isn't too far). I am surprised they sited Portland since there should be no shortage of good microbrews there.
Nowadays, you want a tasty beer and you're willing to spend the money that craft brews require. You've graduated and are onto better, more sophisticated beers. That said we can't forget the important lessons that lagers teach about how to socialize and have fun with beer.
true, beer has a function as a "social lubricant", and pils usually plays this part flawlessly. except the not tasting good part. and did you take a look at that book review? pabst is literally outsourced and made by coors; they have no brewers on staff. the only people who work for pabst are marketers. weird.
ReplyDeletebut aren't those beer pong videos awesome? the one that goes through the stairs is mighty impressive.
While I'm convinced that the U.S. is pushing beer to where it's never been before, I also think so much of it is fad driven (are we really still going to think that Hopslam and Maharaja are that great in 20 years?). We've all latched on to dry hopped this or barrel aged that, that we've forgotten about so many other important styles from around the world. So much focus right now is on the Belgians and West Coast style extra hopped ales. I think part of that can be fueled by geography as well. Here in the southeast we have a limited number of micro breweries and are largely dependent upon what our distributors deem worthy to import, most of which are not lagers, perhaps in part because brain washed craft beer newbies have been trained to think that lagers are largely garbage.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to know about lagers in the U.S., I think you need to go to places where there is actual real historic brewing heritage, such as the upper Midwest or maybe New York and Penn. In my home state of Wisconsin, I've been drinking delicious local pilsners, all malt amber lagers, all kinds of varieties of bocks and dopplebocks (check out Capital Brewings seasonal bock series), dark (dunkle) lagers (Sprecher Black Bavarian or Lakefront East Side Dark), and even some decent yellow lagers that are actually full of flavor (and yes, even a couple with some corn, such as New Glarus Spotted Cow) since I started drinking. And these are just the ones I'm familiar with in WI, not counting other solid ones made across states like MI and MN, most of which don't distribute far because they don't have to to sell a lot (unlike our bible belt breweries here in GA). Or just go to Germany. I'm not sure I saw a single ale there after 7 days of drinking there this spring. And most of that beer certainly did not suck.
Anyways, to end my rant, I agree that there isn't as much good lager being brewed in the U.S. as I'd like to see. But, to write off lager as merely pilsners or macro brewed crap, is completely false and uninformed. Unfortunately though, it's something that beer "snobs" all to often do.
Word. Thanks for the great comment, Kristofor.
ReplyDeleteJust to be clear, I don't think we're arguing - my comment about the "not tasting good part" is in reference to $10/case macrobrew. And our crew loves us some lagers, like Baltic Porters, bocks and dopplebocks as mentioned in the post. Even last night, four of us were enjoying the Schneider-Brooklyn Hopfen-Weiss collaboration (personally I loved the hell out of it). And, yes, I did the obligatory drink-your-way-through-Germany thing, and liked it very much (though I almost always ordered dunkels, rauchbeirs, and the like). Also, I'm all for experimentation with corn, rice, etc (like the Rogue Morimoto and the Hitachino white ale), but using it to deaden taste and cut costs probably isn't going to impress anybody.
Really, it was just the Pils that we haven't been as fond of on the whole. And I think part of that is just what you said: we've been trained (not like brainwashing, but really by what craft brewers typically put out and market) to think lighter=worse. But I think we can agree that most people who like craft beer also like lots of taste, and that isn't indoctrination.
As for your question about the future of brewing, if I had to put money on it, I don't see big hops and quirky things like barrel conditioning going out of style. Those things didn't exist in the States until recently because there wasn't a market for them (prohibition, yada, yada). But German breweries have been doing"extreme" stuff with their beers for a long time (take eisbocks or rauchbiers for example), and the Brits have long had their barleywine. It's just that we didn't do any of that for a long time. Sure, I think the huge surge in interest in craft beers will level off over time, but we'll probably not see people shunning IPAs, at least in the near future.
So, Kristofor: do you think people are deluding themselves when they say they like Maharajah, or more exotic beers? Do you think the Belgian beers really aren't as good as people think they are? And, are you calling me a snob for writing off pilsner when I wrote a whole post about how we all should get more into pilsners?
Thanks again for the comment - rants are great things.
oh, and also, thanks for the list of great beers to try - I look forward to the time when I can get my hands on them.
ReplyDelete