Kolsch or Kolsch-Style?

[PKHomeBrew]

I keep reading that 'it is against the law to call any beer not brewed in Koln a Kolsch - it must be called a Kolsch Style'. I believed that for a long time, and then I swear I saw one in the LCBO (liquor store in Ontario Canada). A quick google shows the number of breweries that call their beer a Kolsch... http://www.lcbo.com/lcbo/search?searchTerm=kolsch

At least eight of these beers were brewed in Canada, and call themselves a Kolsch.

 

[auburntsts]

Against whose law?

 

[triletter]

German law. Only applies within Germany.

 

[SteveHeff]

"The laws protecting the brewing of Kolsch are as strict as Germany's Purity Law of 1516. Kolsch Beer can only be brewed within the city of Cologne. As the best-known Kolsch Brewery, Gaffel's flavor is derived from an ale yeast that is "lagered" or aged in cold cellars."

 

[ScrewyBrewer]

"Officially, the only way to brew an authentic Kölschbier, is to brew it in a brewery that is located within the Cologne (Köln) region of Germany. Even though the brewers in Köln have been brewing mostly Ales for well over a thousand years, the Kölsch style we drink today has only been in existence for about a hundred years. Thanks to the cooperation of Kölsch brewers in 1948, the Kölsch Konvention was created in order to formalize a modern brewing standard for the style. You see in order for the beer to be true to the Kölsch style it had to be fermented with top fermenting yeast, pale in color, very clear and hop accentuated. More recently in 1986, the Kölsch Konvention was amended to include a regional appellation, whereby only breweries that were located within a 50 kilometer zone around Cologne, Germany could legally be called Kölsch beer."

 

[corax]

Certainly not illegal outside the EU. IMO, it's just professional courtesy to call it "Kölsch-style" or "Köln-style", cf. "Sparkling Wine" instead of "Champagne".

 

[ESBrewer]

German law. Only applies within Germany.

It seems to apply here in Finland as well. There was a local brewery that came out with a Kölsch and soon had to to change the name a little bit because Kölsch is protected. But it probably only applies in EU.

 

[cactusgarrett]

Certainly not illegal outside the EU. IMO, it's just professional courtesy to call it "Kölsch-style" or "Köln-style", cf. "Sparkling Wine" instead of "Champagne".

This. Same thing with Lambic and the "p-Lambic" or "Méthode Traditionnelle" monikers.

 

[DownstairsBrewing]

Kolsch is a protected designation within the EU, and the larger European trade agreement areas. The protection could in theory be extended to the US and other areas in the way that 'champagne' has been extended, but that would require trademark action that has not happened yet.

 

[DownstairsBrewing]

Certainly not illegal outside the EU. IMO, it's just professional courtesy to call it "Kölsch-style" or "Köln-style", cf. "Sparkling Wine" instead of "Champagne".

The dropping of champagne as a designation of a style rather than a geographic origin is not a matter of professional courtesy, but the outcome of extensive litigation.

 

[daveMN]

Kolsch is a lot easier to say than "Kolsch-stlye", although the latter is more accurate since I didn't brew it in Cologne. I wouldn't say I make Trappist beers, either, since my home brewery isn't in a Trappist monastery, but I might make a "Trappist-style" beer. It's an interesting question though.

 

[corax]

The dropping of champagne as a designation of a style rather than a geographic origin is not a matter of professional courtesy, but the outcome of extensive litigation.

In what jurisdictions? I'm pretty sure there are still a number of American producers that call it "Champagne" (usually the cheapest and most undrinkably sweet examples).

 

[DownstairsBrewing]

In what jurisdictions? I'm pretty sure there are still a number of American producers that call it "Champagne" (usually the cheapest and most undrinkably sweet examples).

'Still' is the operative word - under the settlement between the EU and the US that prohibited the usage of various terms like 'champagne' for copies not originating from those designated regions, US producers that were already using it were allowed to continue to do so for their established brands. Apparently, the French champagne producers were livid.

 

[GPP33]

Kolsch is a style, so yes, I make a Kolsch that is a Kolsch Style. Saying "Kolsh Style" is kinda redundant so I just call it a "Kolsch". It's the same as my IPA, I say it's an "IPA" even though I have no intention of sending it off to India, obviously it's just an "IPA style". We are really just making "Beer" of different styles. The EU defines a "Kolsch Beer" as something specific but I'm not in the EU so "Kolsch" it is and will always be.

 

[BrewKnob]

I keep reading that 'it is against the law to call any beer not brewed in Koln a Kolsch - it must be called a Kolsch Style'. I believed that for a long time, and then I swear I saw one in the LCBO (liquor store in Ontario Canada). A quick google shows the number of breweries that call their beer a Kolsch... http://www.lcbo.com/lcbo/search?searchTerm=kolsch

At least eight of these beers were brewed in Canada, and call themselves a Kolsch.

I represent the Federal Bureau of Beer Investigation. FBBI. If you have any illegally named beer you must send it to me immediately for disposal.

 

[Lefou]

All my Kolsch-style beer was lost in a most unfortunate boating accident.

 

[dmtaylor]

I keep reading that 'it is against the law to call any beer not brewed in Koln a Kolsch - it must be called a Kolsch Style'. I believed that for a long time, and then I swear I saw one in the LCBO (liquor store in Ontario Canada). A quick google shows the number of breweries that call their beer a Kolsch... http://www.lcbo.com/lcbo/search?searchTerm=kolsch

I appreciate you bringing up this point. You are absolutely right. Ideally, these beers brewed outside of Koln should always be referred to as Kolsch-style beers, not Kolsch beers. Same goes for Trappist-style ales, etc. I speak not as to the legality, but just out of respect for Trappists and those who live in Koln.

 

[GPP33]

Ideally, these beers brewed outside of Koln should always be referred to as Kolsch-style beers, not Kolsch beers. Same goes for Trappist-style ales, etc. I speak not as to the legality, but just out of respect for Trappists and those who live in Koln.

That's a bit of a strange definition of respect. I honor the people who live in Koln by brewing Kolsch beers, an entire style was named after them, I don't have a style named after me! Just like I honor Mexicans by cooking Mexican food, I honor India by cooking Indian food....etc. Or should I call it "Mexican style" and "Indian style"? I certainly wouldn't be offended if someone in Europe brewed a BMC clone and called it an "American Light Lager". Should we respect the people of Germany and not call it beer but a "beer style drink" due to the Reinheitsgebot?

 

[beermanpete]

This type of protection is to prevent unauthorized commercial use of the copyrighted name. I doubt the copyright owners care about homebrewers calling thier homebrew Kolsh or their sparkling wine Champagne.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Kolsch is a style, so yes, I make a Kolsch that is a Kolsch Style. Saying "Kolsh Style" is kinda redundant so I just call it a "Kolsch". It's the same as my IPA, I say it's an "IPA" even though I have no intention of sending it off to India, obviously it's just an "IPA style". We are really just making "Beer" of different styles.

I think that's the point - Europe has far less of a concept of beer "styles", beer is not something you get out of a book but a statement of identity that can't be divorced from its history and geography. Americans aren't rooted in the same way. Compare how US sports teams are franchises to move from city to city whereas European teams are named simply Liverpool FC or FC Barcelona. They are forever tied to a particular geography which in turn ties them to the history of their region and its cultural identity. You can't buy that - but people who use the name are trying to profit from that history.

Sure, there's an element in which the people of Cologne are trying to build a "brand" like the Trappists have - partly for commercial reasons but also for quality reasons. You may feel that you're honouring them by your attempt to copy their beer, but they feel like you (or at least commercial producers) are trying to pass off a poor imitation in their name. Do you think Rolex feel honoured by all the people selling "Rolexes" in Hong Kong?

Compare Scotch ale and Scotch whisky. The US interpretation of Scotch ale resembles the original even less than IPA or English muffins, it's complete nonsense. In contrast, Scotch whisky is a textbook example of protecting their brand - you are in no doubt that it comes from Scotland. What's more, by preventing foreign whiskies calling themselves "Scotch", it's done other areas a favour in the long term by giving them the confidence to develop their own identity as Irish, Japanese, bourbon etc. There seems to be something similar happening with lambic at the moment, the US producers being forced to make that leap from clones to being a thing in their own right.

So no, kolsch isn't a "style".

 

[dmtaylor]

That's a bit of a strange definition of respect. I honor the people who live in Koln by brewing Kolsch beers, an entire style was named after them, I don't have a style named after me! Just like I honor Mexicans by cooking Mexican food, I honor India by cooking Indian food....etc. Or should I call it "Mexican style" and "Indian style"? I certainly wouldn't be offended if someone in Europe brewed a BMC clone and called it an "American Light Lager". Should we respect the people of Germany and not call it beer but a "beer style drink" due to the Reinheitsgebot?

There are laws and rules for some of these things, but not for others. I guess my assumption is that if there are laws or rules, then they care, but if there aren't, then they don't.

 

[cactusgarrett]

It's a quirky subject. Despite me being more educated on beer topics (such as this) than they typical Joe Schmo consumer, whenever I see the "-style" modifier added to an American beer, I'm trained to think that the brewery has bastardized the style in some way and added some weird twist. My first reaction is to think their "-style" addition is to convey this in a subtle way. I know it's not right/accurate, but when I want a Kolsch, and I'm confronted with two beers, in a vacuum I would instinctually choose the one that says "Kolsch" over the one that says "Kolsch-style Ale".

 

[GPP33]

I think that's the point - Europe has far less of a concept of beer "styles", beer is not something you get out of a book but a statement of identity that can't be divorced from its history and geography. Americans aren't rooted in the same way. Compare how US sports teams are franchises to move from city to city whereas European teams are named simply Liverpool FC or FC Barcelona. They are forever tied to a particular geography which in turn ties them to the history of their region and its cultural identity. You can't buy that - but people who use the name are trying to profit from that history.

Sure, there's an element in which the people of Cologne are trying to build a "brand" like the Trappists have - partly for commercial reasons but also for quality reasons. You may feel that you're honouring them by your attempt to copy their beer, but they feel like you (or at least commercial producers) are trying to pass off a poor imitation in their name. Do you think Rolex feel honoured by all the people selling "Rolexes" in Hong Kong?

Compare Scotch ale and Scotch whisky. The US interpretation of Scotch ale resembles the original even less than IPA or English muffins, it's complete nonsense. In contrast, Scotch whisky is a textbook example of protecting their brand - you are in no doubt that it comes from Scotland. What's more, by preventing foreign whiskies calling themselves "Scotch", it's done other areas a favour in the long term by giving them the confidence to develop their own identity as Irish, Japanese, bourbon etc. There seems to be something similar happening with lambic at the moment, the US producers being forced to make that leap from clones to being a thing in their own right.

So no, kolsch isn't a "style".

When I say “Kölsch” do you picture a very specific type of beer? Yes? Then it’s a style. If there were a bunch of different styles that were all called Kölsch then Kölsch would be a geographical descriptor. Things may very well be different in Europe, the OP asked about countries outside of Europe though.

Oh yea, these guys also think it’s a style.

https://www.bjcp.org/2008styles/style06.php#1c

And I hear you on Rolex, that’s a different deal though. They are a private company, a single entity who has invested in R&D and created a product they can take to market.

 

[soccerdad]

I have a Kolsch in the fermenter. But it was not brewed in Koln. Kinda Kolsch I guess since I bastardized it with 4 oz Canadian Honey Malt. Muddy Waters named it for me and he said nothing about Kolsch or Kolsch style. Honey Bee. "Sail on. Sail on my little honey bee, sail on."

 

[Northern_Brewer]

whenever I see the "-style" modifier added to an American beer, I'm trained to think that the brewery has bastardized the style in some way and added some weird twist. My first reaction is to think their "-style" addition is to convey this in a subtle way. I know it's not right/accurate, but when I want a Kolsch, and I'm confronted with two beers, in a vacuum I would instinctually choose the one that says "Kolsch" over the one that says "Kolsch-style Ale".

Well that is the argument - just the fact that it being brewed outside Cologne means that it has been bastardised, even if they are using all the right ingredients. Now it may be less bastardised than other examples accessible to you, but maybe you have to go to Cologne to appreciate that even a less-bastardised US example is still lacking a certain something that comes from that sense of place.

I'm trying to think of US examples, but a) it's less of a thing there and b) I don't know the US food/drink scene so well. (quick look at Wikipedia) OK, it's not quite the same, but imagine if your local sausage factory moved to Brazil. Leaving aside the fact that it's a corporate name as well, would they still be Johnsonville brats if they were made to the same recipe in Brazil, out of Brazilian meat? Or would something have been lost? Would Oshkosh trucks be the same if they were made outside Wisconsin?

It's not the same but hopefully the prospect of Johnsonville brats being made in Brazil stirs some of the same emotions that the people of Cologne feel about kolsch becoming genericised.

 

[day_trippr]

Eff it, I'm brewing a Kolsch tomorrow.
Bring on the Beer Police!

Cheers!

 

[GPP33]

Well that is the argument - just the fact that it being brewed outside Cologne means that it has been bastardised, even if they are using all the right ingredients. Now it may be less bastardised than other examples accessible to you, but maybe you have to go to Cologne to appreciate that even a less-bastardised US example is still lacking a certain something that comes from that sense of place.

I'm trying to think of US examples, but a) it's less of a thing there and b) I don't know the US food/drink scene so well. (quick look at Wikipedia) OK, it's not quite the same, but imagine if your local sausage factory moved to Brazil. Leaving aside the fact that it's a corporate name as well, would they still be Johnsonville brats if they were made to the same recipe in Brazil, out of Brazilian meat? Or would something have been lost? Would Oshkosh trucks be the same if they were made outside Wisconsin?

It's not the same but hopefully the prospect of Johnsonville brats being made in Brazil stirs some of the same emotions that the people of Cologne feel about kolsch becoming genericised.

Johnsonville are kinda the bottom of the barrel when it comes to brats. I don't think it matters where they were made, they'd still suck. Now I can see the people in Germany being pissed that we call those things Bratwurst! If you want an American food that that has roots in a certain area it'd be BBQ, southern style, Carolina style and Texas style are the main ones. I'm sure people down south who have been making amazing BBQ for generations would laugh at the guy in big city suburb using an electric smoker and calling it southern BBQ but if you take bubba and plop him in New York City with his smoker, the right wood, the right seasoning and the right ingredients to make his sauce it'd probably be just as good as he can make back home and he'd probably still call it southern BBQ. Now would it taste as good on a city street that stinks of trash and piss with with cars hoking as it would in the backyard of some little house off a dirt road in Georgia with 4 generations of family all gathering together, probably not.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

When I say “Kölsch” do you picture a very specific type of beer? Yes? Then it’s a style. If there were a bunch of different styles that were all called Kölsch then Kölsch would be a geographical descriptor. Things may very well be different in Europe, the OP asked about countries outside of Europe though.

Oh yea, these guys also think it’s a style.

https://www.bjcp.org/2008styles/style06.php#1c

There's a bunch of breweries that produce individual beers that are sui generis, but who get quoted as "styles" in the way you suggest because we don't have a name for the "style" yet. But with the beer world globalising and even the "unique" beers getting cloned in the way that Scotch whisky was, we are going to need to develop new vocabulary to describe those style in a generic, non-geographical, way. So for instance Champagne is a specific example of the wider category of methode traditionelle sparkling wine.

A classic example is Anchor Steam - no doubt that conjures a picture of a very specific type of beer, and until recently you would have said "that's like Anchor Steam" - but the phrase "California Common" was created as a generic style that includes that specific beer. For a long time Orval was unique, but people have proposed "dry-hopped Bretted ale" to describe the emerging style that includes Orval but also Hill Farmstead Dorothy and Burning Sky Recusant.

In effect the signatories of the Kölsch Convention are asking to be treated as the same way as Anchor or the champagne growers. They are also private companies, and are equally entitled to protection of their historical investment as Rolex - and I suspect their combined production of beer is rather less than Anchor's. We just don't have the language yet that is equivalent to California Common. Or at least, I suspect there is the right word that lies between "all German ales" and "Kölsch", I just don't know my German beer well enough. There must be one, to reflect conditions before German beer was destroyed by the Bavarians.

As for the BJCP - it's notable that there isn't a European equivalent, despite the long history of brewing and homebrewing in Europe. And they don't half get it wrong sometimes when they try to make up styles to force individual beers into their paradigm of styles - Northern and Southern browns being notable examples that fortunately they admitted were a mistake with no basis in history.

 

[Northern_Brewer]

Johnsonville are kinda the bottom of the barrel when it comes to brats. I don't think it matters where they were made, they'd still suck.

It's not really the point whether they're crap or not, they're OUR crap. Again it's a bit different, but compare how Coke and Budweiser have marketed the consumption of their products as the essence of being American, I don't think you would say their products were great either?

if you take bubba and plop him in New York City with his smoker, the right wood, the right seasoning and the right ingredients to make his sauce it'd probably be just as good as he can make back home and he'd probably still call it southern BBQ. Now would it taste as good on a city street that stinks of trash and piss with with cars hoking as it would in the backyard of some little house off a dirt road in Georgia with 4 generations of family all gathering together, probably not.

Even that's slightly missing the point - although you'd regard Bubba's BBQ place as more authentic than Jo from NYC's BBQ joint, no? But "Southern" BBQ is too broad a region, it's not quite the same as a product that is identified with a single town. I guess it would have to be somewhere on the East Coast as these things need time to bed down into culture, but Chesapeake Bay crabs are perhaps the only one that comes to mind. Practicalities of biology etc aside, would you buy "Chesapeake Bay crabs" grown in Florida, or would you feel like you were being missold?

Perhaps that kind of association works better in other areas that move more quickly, where it takes less time to build up the association that eg Detroit has with cars and music. How would Detroit feel if someone in Toronto started making "Motown" music? Again, it's not a perfect example, I'm just trying to impart a feeling of the emotions that these things involve.

 

[GPP33]

So I did a little research on these laws, seem they are rather common in Europe. Interesting read.....We have a couple in the US but they are more focused on a name which includes both the region of origin and the product description (i.e. Tennessee Whisky). Interestingly enough calling a beer a "Kolsch-Style" is still not allowed under the law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geogr...raditional_specialities_in_the_European_Union