I recently tried a Scotch Ale at a local pub that prides itself in providing quality beer, and before my first taste of that retched thing I would agree. Does anyone like this without forcing it down a few times?
Scotch Ale. An aquired taste?
- Thread starter JDFlow
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
TheSmithsEra
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2012
- Messages
- 519
- Reaction score
- 50
Scotch ale is great but I think some are better then others.
ReverseApacheMaster
Well-Known Member
What did you dislike about it?
schoellhorn82
Well-Known Member
I love scotch ales. Only in the fall and winter though. I have had plenty of different breweries scotch ales and some are just ok and some are great. It may be an acquired taste for you though. You should try to brew one yourself after doing some research on that style. I hated Belgian ales until I researched, brewed, and drank other brewers. Now it is one of my favorites.
I don't know much about the style. The one I had was definitely aged in oak. The smokey oak flavor and the malt sweetness made it way to rich. Me and my girlfriend shared the entire pint searching for positives but never really found any. Maybe I'll hit the bottle shop and grab some singles to see if I can find a better one.
hotspurdotus
Well-Known Member
I would consider Scotch Ale to be an accessible style. Big, malty, slightly sweet; not a lot there that demands a highly developed palette. Either you just got a bad one or the style's not for you.
I love Scotch Ales, btw.
I love Scotch Ales, btw.
Some are smoked, which I HATE. Others are not. The non-smoked Scottish ales are rich, malty, flavorful and quite sweet. Those I really like.
They also come in 30 Shilling, 60 Shilling, etc., each one getting stronger and more flavorful all the way up to Wee Heavy. Which did you try?
They also come in 30 Shilling, 60 Shilling, etc., each one getting stronger and more flavorful all the way up to Wee Heavy. Which did you try?
I think smoke and oak are WAY overdone in many commercial Scotch ales. The best ones I've tasted rely on subtle, if any, use of those flavor components. Good examples exist; you just have to keep trying until you find one you like. Unless you just don't care for the style...
Oddly enough, Old Chub from Oskar Blues has smoked malt in the grist, but for some reason it works for me.
I brewed a wee heavy last year that turned out fantastic. I bottled half of it with a good measure of Highland single malt whisky. Sadly, I just drank the last bottle over the weekend. Time to make more!
Oddly enough, Old Chub from Oskar Blues has smoked malt in the grist, but for some reason it works for me.
I brewed a wee heavy last year that turned out fantastic. I bottled half of it with a good measure of Highland single malt whisky. Sadly, I just drank the last bottle over the weekend. Time to make more!
bobbafett
Member
I agree with the too much smoke, I only use .25# in a 10 gal batch, only a hint of smoke. I don't want to drink a pint of liquid smoke!
The Sam Adams version is a great example of one with too much peat smoked malt. Highland Brewing Company and Moylan's both make a great and nicely balanced Scotch Ale. Too much of anything, IMO, can ruin a beer...
Gameface
Well-Known Member
I made my first 80/- Scottish Ale recently and it is cold crashing now. I've never tried a commercial example, or any example for that matter.
My wife loved the smell of the sample I pulled before cold crashing. She usually doesn't like the aroma of beer at that stage.
My wife loved the smell of the sample I pulled before cold crashing. She usually doesn't like the aroma of beer at that stage.
I've always loved Scotch ales, even though I've only had a few. Old Chub was my first and I've also had Belhaven, Founder's Dirty Bastard and a few others of which I regrettably don't remember the names. 
trumpetbeard
Well-Known Member
I'd like to plug Great Divide's Claymore Scotch Ale as another fine commercial example. Rohrbach Brewery in Rochester, NY has a Scotch Ale as one of their flagship beers, and I personally love it, but it's difficult to find outside of Western NY.
But to answer your original question, you personally might find them an acquired taste, but I'd bet that it was more a reaction to the particular beer you drank than the style itself. Or you could just hate the style. Now you have an excuse to try more beer for 'research' purposes.
But to answer your original question, you personally might find them an acquired taste, but I'd bet that it was more a reaction to the particular beer you drank than the style itself. Or you could just hate the style. Now you have an excuse to try more beer for 'research' purposes.
I do lots of research. I'm basically a scientist.
SixStrings
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2012
- Messages
- 63
- Reaction score
- 3
I totally agree with this. The smokey/barrel-aged flavors really have to mesh with the other components of the beer for me to consider them enjoyable. If they're just kind of thrown in as an afterthought or simply out of authenticity it will often make the beer very offputting. I feel like I could say this for many other styles come to think of it.
Heavy house Scotch ale from big sky brewery is one of my favorites. Seems fairly balanced for what it is. Happened to pick some up this evening. don't choke anything down, try different ones and get a bit of perspective.
Whattawort
Well-Known Member
Taquair House Ale. That is all.
AndrewD
Well-Known Member
According to Jamil, the very slight smokey or peat character in Scotch Ales should never come from peat-smoked malt. He's not sure where it comes from, but he doesn't use smoked malt of any kind.
ACESFULL
Well-Known Member
As I was reading thru this I was thinking the same thing. Boys/Girls there shouldn't be any smoked malt in ANY Scottish style, if there is its not to style. Mind you if you follow style the base malt is increased and the specialty malts are always the same. That is unless you caramelize in the kettle.
http://www.bjcp.org/2008styles/style09.php
Whattawort
Well-Known Member
I just add the smoke flavor the way the Scots used to. You know, with cigar ashes and left over bacon. No complaints yet.
Agreed on all counts. I have yet to find a smoked scotch ale that didn't taste like a campfire smells. Any one know of a mildly smoked scotch ale?
Well, except for the missing "r".
Whattawort
Well-Known Member
weirdboy said:
Simple symantecs. We'll chalk that up to me doing my civil duty on National Drink Beer day.
Tell me about it! I'm covering the quota for both myself and my wife.
I have a leftover bottle of my first place winning wee heavy in the fridge, but I've been sort of saving it and drinking other stuff instead.
Whattawort
Well-Known Member
weirdboy said:
I had to drink the Blue Moon Pumpkin. My pipeline is running a little thin because my brew schedule got pushed back....again.
With all due respect, as I am sure Jamil is an EXCELLENT brewer, I would disagree with his assessment that smoked malt is inappropriate in a Scotch Ale.
First of all, the BJCP guidelines specifically mention smoked malt and while the BJCP is certainly not the be-all-end all of brewing "rules," it DOES seem to be the most cited reference when you are dealing with styles concerning homebrew. For this reason, I do not understand how he can say the ingredient is inappropriate.
In addition to this, the character of "smoke" or "peat" in the beer must have originated somewhere. How do we know this character did not start in Scotland? Absence of evidence does not prove a negative. If ANYthing, one could look at historical references from Scotland and probably make a pretty strong case for using heather in the beer more than anything.
With that said, do I feel smoked malt (or even smoke character) is necessary in a Scotch Ale? ...absolutely not... but do I feel we should have one brewer's OPINION of a beer determine what builds a beer style? ...again, no way.
Oh, I just had a couple of Founder's Dirty Bastards last night and LOVED it! I think I'll drink the rest of the 6-pack tonight :cross:
First of all, the BJCP guidelines specifically mention smoked malt and while the BJCP is certainly not the be-all-end all of brewing "rules," it DOES seem to be the most cited reference when you are dealing with styles concerning homebrew. For this reason, I do not understand how he can say the ingredient is inappropriate.
In addition to this, the character of "smoke" or "peat" in the beer must have originated somewhere. How do we know this character did not start in Scotland? Absence of evidence does not prove a negative. If ANYthing, one could look at historical references from Scotland and probably make a pretty strong case for using heather in the beer more than anything.
With that said, do I feel smoked malt (or even smoke character) is necessary in a Scotch Ale? ...absolutely not... but do I feel we should have one brewer's OPINION of a beer determine what builds a beer style? ...again, no way.
Oh, I just had a couple of Founder's Dirty Bastards last night and LOVED it! I think I'll drink the rest of the 6-pack tonight :cross:
Made a kilt lifter with rauch malt and absolutely loved it.. then I made the same recipe but the lhbs was out of rauch malt and substituted peat smoked malt and it was not good.. the peat smoked was almost acidic.. I learned the hard way that smoked malts are not equal and I should of added allot less of the peat smoked..
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2012
- Messages
- 180
- Reaction score
- 6
Saxomophone
Well-Known Member
Was the scotch ale you tried that oak aged Innis and Gunn? I love Scotch ales but I bought a bottle of that stuff to try because it sounded interesting and had a very hard time finishing it.
The oak added a harsh almost medicinal bitterness to the beer. Try some others that other posters suggested before you write off the style.
The oak added a harsh almost medicinal bitterness to the beer. Try some others that other posters suggested before you write off the style.
Darwin18
Well-Known Member
I believe Jamil's comments in BCS regarding the use of smoke malt is because homebrewers have a tendency to vastly over do it with this ingredient.
From the BJCP 2008 guidelines (http://www.bjcp.org/docs/2008_Guidelines.pdf) on the Scottish styles:
"The malt-hop balance is slightly to moderately tilted towards the malt side. Any caramelization comes from kettle caramelization and not caramel malt (and is sometimes confused with diacetyl). Although unusual, any smoky character is yeast or water derived and not from the use of peat-smoked malts. Use of peat-smoked malts to replicate the peaty character should be restrained; overly smoky beers should be entered in the Other Smoked Beer category (22B) rather than here."
Whattawort
Well-Known Member
FWIW - Had a Founder's Dirty Bastard for the first time yesterday. Damn good beer.
HawksBrewer
Well-Known Member
Just adding to the list of good commercial examples - Founder's Dirty Bastard for sure, followed closely by 3 Floyd's Robert the Bruce.
ceannt
Well-Known Member
Oak and smoke .... no
The peat taste comes from tannins in the water... not from smoke.
Sadly there are very few commercial examples of this overly misunderstood style that are worth drinking.... even in Scotland ... most of the good breweries have been bought out by big corporate scum bags
The peat taste comes from tannins in the water... not from smoke.
Sadly there are very few commercial examples of this overly misunderstood style that are worth drinking.... even in Scotland ... most of the good breweries have been bought out by big corporate scum bags
ReverseApacheMaster
Well-Known Member
Scottish strains throw off some smoky phenolics but if you're not using a scottish strain and/or you aren't getting enough phenolic character, a tiny amount of smoked malt can get you to where it should be.
I guess I've been fortunate enough to not try a scotch ale overloaded with smoke. It shouldn't be smokey. You should have to work a little to detect the smoke. It shouldn't have a strong feet taste from peat malt nor should it have a bacon flavor from rauchmalt.
I guess I've been fortunate enough to not try a scotch ale overloaded with smoke. It shouldn't be smokey. You should have to work a little to detect the smoke. It shouldn't have a strong feet taste from peat malt nor should it have a bacon flavor from rauchmalt.
Gameface
Well-Known Member
I'm enjoying the first batch of Scotch Ale I've made...and the first Scotch Ale I've ever tried. I would try to increase the mouthfeel for the next batch and probably mash a little higher, but it's very easy drinkin' beer. Doesn't seem like an acquired taste kind of thing so far.
I used the Scottish Ale yeast from WYEAST and fermented at 53F for 3 weeks followed by 1 week at 35F. I didn't use any smoked or peated malts. I did use some 30L and 20L as well as 0.5lb of aromatic and 0.5lb pale chocolate malt. 14lbs of MO as the base malt. 2oz of EKG at 60min, no other additions. 10 gallon batch.
I used the Scottish Ale yeast from WYEAST and fermented at 53F for 3 weeks followed by 1 week at 35F. I didn't use any smoked or peated malts. I did use some 30L and 20L as well as 0.5lb of aromatic and 0.5lb pale chocolate malt. 14lbs of MO as the base malt. 2oz of EKG at 60min, no other additions. 10 gallon batch.
ACESFULL
Well-Known Member
So I guessing that contradiction is ok with you? You may want to go back and read your post. Peat malt & or smoked malt is not from smoked malt but from specialty malts, water & brewing process. Its not just Jamil, he maybe more vocal than others but to me smoked malt doesn't belong in Scottish ales of any kind.
I don't remember the name.
Similar threads
