What are your contrarian/"unpopular" beer opinions?

There's also a valuable distinction between levels of "pro" brewers.
Just because a couple of guys who like beer open up a brewery (that will probably only be around 3-5 years before going bankrupt) and thereby become "pro" brewers, doesn't mean they are anywhere near the level of established pro brewers who are turning out consistent, good product and have been for years.

To that point, a lot (not all) of my beer IS better than that I taste from a lot of "pro" brewers, because there are a lot of small startup breweries that are making just decent beer, which is really no better than good homebrew.

Again, all you need in order to be called a "pro" brewer is to brew for a living (for those couple of years until your start=up brewery goes under).

 

People worry way to much about yeast pitch rates. Yes it's important to some extent and you should try to get close; but outside of extremely high gravity beers, large batches, and lagers, slightly underpitching isn't going to make a perceivable difference.

The health of the yeast you're pitching matters more than quantity.

 

I really hate Simcoe.

 

Watch your mouth

 

I really hope so but sadly I doubt it could happen. Brewing a great lager is beyond the skill set of most craft brewers and more then likely not possible with their current equipment.

 

I don't think they ever went away and need to make a comeback. If you avoid lite beers, even some of the mass produced lagers are good. And if I have to drink light beer, Miller Lite tastes better to me than Coors Light or Bud Light. Which is strange, because I prefer Bud over Miller High Life.

 

I'm speaking more to German style lagers. Go into any brewpub or craft brewery and look for a Pils, Helles, or a Munich Dunkel. Good luck. Maybe one in five will have one of them.
But I think people are getting tired of overhopping everything and are settling back to classic, good, drinkable beer.

And I agree that if you have to drink a light American lager, Miller Lite is the way to go.

 

The pros have skills far above the average homebrewer, no doubt. But I contend that the difference between the two is consistency and flexibility. For example, I'd rather have a certain friend's Belgian dark strong (if it's one of his good batches) than most commercial beers. But stay away from his IPA attempts.

 

My contrary opinion: All beers should be very well carbonated, style be damned.

 

I agree completely.

 

Totally disagree.
Case in point: I recently entered an Amber (Franconian) Kellerbier in a local competition. Both judges said it was undercarbonated.
Clearly neither of them have ever had a proper traditional Franconian Kellerbier. I don't fault them for that, because there is not a single good example to be found in the 'States, but you should really know a little something about the style you are judging (a Kellerbier is a lot like a German lager version of an English Cask Ale).
But my Franconian future Father-in-Law said he thought it was as good as any he gets at home (he and I have shared quite a few Kellerbiers back in Germany (Franconia).

 

A highly-carbed Scottish Heavy is a crime. I know. I recently made one.

 

I too, disagree.

I prefer extremely low levels of carbonation in both ales and lagers, and usually pour very vigorously then wait to allow the beers to off-gas before they become too warm to enjoy.

My only exception is high gravity, low attenuation styles. I prefer "normal" carbonation levels in those to help offset some of the viscosity. I let those rest too before drinking.

At home I just target much lower levels of CO2.

 

I didn't do it on purpose. It just sort of... happened.

I've managed to choke most of it down.

 

Should have just released the excess pressure from the bottles. I just finished degassing a porter. Fairly simple process.

 

Bottling is enough of a pain in the first place. Rebottling an entire batch sounds like my idea of hell.

 

No rebottling necessary. Don't even need new caps.

 

What, you just... pry up the cap, let it hiss off, and then stick it back in the capping press?

 

Looks like I nailed the contrary opinion part.

I entered a local competition sponsored by the local homebrew supply. It was not a style competition but rather we were all issued the same ingredients and just supposed to brew a good beer.

My carbonation was exactly what I was shooting for. A judge (not certified, just a local pro brewer) took off points for over-carbonation.

I confess to just a little hyperbole. There are obviously great beers that aren't crazily carbonated. But generally the only flat beer I drink comes from my final gravity samples.

 

That is about it with the right style of bottle opener. I'm using the old style combo bottle/can opener. The prong that lifts the cap is only three-sixteenths of an inch wide. Lift gently to release some CO2. The cap will usually self seal. Some bottles will ooze some CO2 after release of the opener. Not a problem. CO2 coming out keeps air from going in.

Line up the bottles. Start from one end of the line and then go back to the first bottle and release some gas again. When foam no longer reaches to the cap inside the bottles you may be at the right carbonation level. Crimp the caps on each bottle and refrigerate. Check again the next day or later for excess carbonation that may remain.

Don't try this with bottles that haven't been chilled for a few days.

 

WHAT!?!?! HYPERBOLE?!?!?!
I am LITERALLY beside myself with hysteria at your careless and wanton use of exaggerated sentiment, sir. LITERALLY beside myself!

And if there are three things that I hate more than ANYTHING else on the planet, they are:
1: Hyperbole
2: Lists
3: Irony

 

Hyperbole is worse than a million Hitlers.

 

If I didn't know better I would think the term "maltster" referred to a hip person that serves milkshakes.

 

Close. A hipster that makes bootleg liquor.

 

Malt vinegar is for salad dressing or fish. It ain't for drinking unless you've acquired a certain fetish for the taste.

 

You're both wrong. They're misspelled English candies.

 

If I've said that once I've said it two million times.

 

Appearance in beer is over rated. Who cares what it looks like, as long as it's tasty?

Arguing over the difference between opaque and hazy is ridiculous, and to actually put man labor hours into making it one way or the other is silly.

 

I think hipsters are cool....now that's contrarian

 

That's not contrarian, it's just early-onset senility setting in.

 

Pilsner beers taste like crap. There's nothing going on in the glass... They're basically extremely boring

 

I only drink Pilsner when something with more flavor is not available. That would never be the case in Bruges.

 

I'm a huge hophead, mostly brew ales. Still, sounds like you've never had a decent pilsner. While not necessarily my favorite style I can appreciate the crisp, clean base supporting the bitterness and flavor of noble hops. Done well it is an excellent beer. But then I feel that way about most styles...if well executed I tend to enjoy them!

 

Then you're either drinking the wrong Pilsners, or your palate has been wrecked by getting used to too much hops.

For most American Pilsners, I would agree with you. Even a lot of German and Czech Pilsners aren't that great (I'm looking at you, Radeburger).

Find yourself a good Bavarian Pils and try it with an open mind and a fresh, attentive palate, and you will find plenty going on.

Unfortunately for that experience, you have to go to Germany or find someone here making really good Pilsners (not easy to do).

A GOOD pilsner is pretty much the pinnacle of brewing craft and one of the most difficult styles to brew well (along with Kolsch and Munich Helles).
As I've said before, IPAs are the Sesame Street of brewing. Nothing wrong with IPAs, but they are about the easiest style to make a decent version of.
Even NEIPAs (which I love). I don't know why there are so many threads with so many people asking advice on making them. They are actually super easy.

 

The poster you're quoting has the location set as Bruges, Belgium...

It is not much work to get to Germany from there...

That said... It may still be this poster just hasn't had a good pilsner... When I spent my summer in Dortmund I was planning for a weekend trip to Bruges so I was asking all the Germans I talked to what they thought of Belgian beer. I never got a real response other than "They're strong".

The fernseherbier is definitely bland, just easy to drink. But there are a lot of very flavorful pilsners in Germany... I really don't think good ones get shipped across the border even to somewhere as close as Bruges... But with the phenomenal beers available in Bruges I don't know if I'd be searching them out either.

 

I've done blind taste tests at work and my beer has won every time. The sample size may not fit in a statistics confidence interval, but it was good enough for me. My club has a table serving at most local brewfests and we usually draw the biggest crowd. We get tons of people coming back for 4th and 5th pours, saying that ours is the best beer here.

Pro brewers have budget and time constraints that homebrewers don't. They also often choose a safe middle ground, because it is more marketable, instead of pushing boundaries. I'd also bet I have been brewing longer than some of of the new ones that pop up every year.

 

Very true. The vast majority of beer made in Germany these days is Pils, but much of it is mass market swill.
In Bavaria, and more specifically Franconia, you will find the good craft-brewed beers that made Germany famous for beer.

 

Adding flour to beer is a travesty. It's just as bad as adding green food coloring to beer for all the sheeple who drink it on St. Patty's Day.

And yes, the word sheeple was officially added to the Webster's dictionary. Win.

 

Contrarian? I couldn't agree more.
Except that Radeberger part. I loves me some fresh Radeberg lager!
And apparently Vladimir Putin does too. So there is that.