Lambic Discussion Thread

[kscaldef]

Adding to the old dusty bottle experiences:

1984 Eylenbosch (unlabeled, 1L, shrink wrap on the cork) - Fascinating and unique. Not bad. Not sublime. Hard to describe the flavors, although it was fairly mushroomy

1991 De Neve - great stuff, still lively with a great lemon & hay aroma

1997 (I think) 3F - at the restaurant, nicely mellowed but still funky

50th Anny & 1999 3F - honestly didn't strike me as great 3F bottlings, but perfectly fine

1999 Bellevue - enamel stripper.

 

[owens99]

Did Armand make another batch of Intense Red Kriek for 2014?

Bottled 2014, released recently, as in within the last week, I believe.

So has anyone tried the recent version? I didn't care too much for the 2012 version, but I'm tempted to make a BIAB order and try the 2014.

 

[drbenzo1]

Loosely related to above, I'm aware that lambic generally ages "well." I've had 14 year old lambic once and see plenty of great reviews of similar lambic from 98, 99, 00 range. I don't see too much older, let alone a lot older beyond a few trainwrecks (dontdrinkbeer's review of the 81 Belle Vue gueuze comes to mind). Is there a general consensus of how lambic can age beyond 15 years? I'm talking 25, 40, 50 years. Are you going to have more luck with Cantillon vs. some of the lesser gueuzeries (is that word?)?

http://www.talkbeer.com/community/threads/lambic-discussion-thread.1406/page-88#post-316257

The Belle-Vue we opened was not good. The best I could date it was late 70's to early 80's. It had plenty of oxidation, and it was definitely back sweetened.
The Brabantiae (1989) was amazing. The most interesting beer I have ever tasted. The musty smell and the smooth taste...
1996 Cantillon Gueuze was perfect, and would love more...

The oldest was back sweetened and not good. But the Brabantiae had that musty factor. But that 1996 was by far the best in terms of taste I would say. I have had plenty from the 2000's in terms Gueuze or fruited lambic from Cantillon and 3F and they all have mostly aged wonderfully.

My 2 cents. The older Lambics that you can't determine are back sweetened without opening them are a major gamble. But that Brabantiae proved to be a success in my experience.

 

[matedog]

http://www.talkbeer.com/community/threads/lambic-discussion-thread.1406/page-88#post-316257

The Belle-Vue we opened was not good. The best I could date it was late 70's to early 80's. It had plenty of oxidation, and it was definitely back sweetened.
The Brabantiae (1989) was amazing. The most interesting beer I have ever tasted. The musty smell and the smooth taste...
1996 Cantillon Gueuze was perfect, and would love more...

The oldest was back sweetened and not good. But the Brabantiae had that musty factor. But that 1996 was by far the best in terms of taste I would say. I have had plenty from the 2000's in terms Gueuze or fruited lambic from Cantillon and 3F and they all have mostly aged wonderfully.

My 2 cents. The older Lambics that you can't determine are back sweetened without opening them are a major gamble. But that Brabantiae proved to be a success in my experience.

When you say "back sweetened", is that just adding sweetener ala Lindemann's fruited lambics?

 

[SeaWatchman]

http://www.talkbeer.com/community/threads/lambic-discussion-thread.1406/page-88#post-316257

The Belle-Vue we opened was not good. The best I could date it was late 70's to early 80's. It had plenty of oxidation, and it was definitely back sweetened.
The Brabantiae (1989) was amazing. The most interesting beer I have ever tasted. The musty smell and the smooth taste...
1996 Cantillon Gueuze was perfect, and would love more...

The oldest was back sweetened and not good. But the Brabantiae had that musty factor. But that 1996 was by far the best in terms of taste I would say. I have had plenty from the 2000's in terms Gueuze or fruited lambic from Cantillon and 3F and they all have mostly aged wonderfully.

My 2 cents. The older Lambics that you can't determine are back sweetened without opening them are a major gamble. But that Brabantiae proved to be a success in my experience.

You can pretty much bet that most lambics that are around from the 70s and 80s are backsweetened unless they're Drie or Cantillon, and even then... there is still a small chance they are.

 

[drbenzo1]

When you say "back sweetened", is that just adding sweetener ala Lindemann's fruited lambics?

Yes. And I think they used saccharine back then. Let me check this new site I found called lambic.info

 

[Rowingbrewer1]

You can pretty much bet that most lambics that are around from the 70s and 80s are backsweetened unless they're Drie or Cantillon, and even then... there is still a small chance they are.

I thought for sure you were going to correct him on Brabantiae dating

 

[SeaWatchman]

I thought for sure you were going to correct him on Brabantiae dating

Well, that too.

DRBENZO WTF Y U NO READ THE INFO SITE

 

[drbenzo1]

https://www.lambic.info/Sweetened_Lambic

 

[drbenzo1]

Well, that too.

DRBENZO WTF Y U NO READ THE INFO SITE

https://www.lambic.info/Cantillon_Brabantiae

 

[GetchaPull]

Aside from a 1999 Organic Gueuze I had in 2013, the oldest I've had was a 1991 De Neve (thanks ThreeFishes) in 2014.

Both were excellent...subdued in all regards but with great depth of flavors/funk. So happy neither were acetic bombs.

 

[Xul1]

Has anyone figured out why LAX customs is taking so long or is it just the mystery of government bureaucracy? I have two boxes that appear to have finally cleared customs this morning after arriving on February 8th...obviously I'm glad they seem to have gotten through, but the time difference between spending 5 - 10 days in JFK versus almost a month in LAX is baffling.

 

[ineedbeer1]

Has anyone figured out why LAX customs is taking so long or is it just the mystery of government bureaucracy? I have two boxes that appear to have finally cleared customs this morning after arriving on February 8th...obviously I'm glad they seem to have gotten through, but the time difference between spending 5 - 10 days in JFK versus almost a month in LAX is baffling.

I would call them to confirm they cleared and that they are not being shipped back. You may be able to call USPS (Tracking doesn't tell you where they are going once they clear customs).

 

[Xul1]

I would call them to confirm they cleared and that they are not being shipped back. You may be able to call USPS (Tracking doesn't tell you where they are going once they clear customs).

The USPS tracking tool says "Your item cleared United States Customs at 7:33 am on March 5, 2015." The last time I had a box get sent back to Belgium, it never showed that message. I guess it could still be sent back but "cleared US Customs" seems pretty specific.

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not being argumentative, I'm going to give them a call this afternoon, more so was curious if anyone knows why LAX Customs is taking so much longer to process things than JFK Customs.

 

[EliotRosewater]

The USPS tracking tool says "Your item cleared United States Customs at 7:33 am on March 5, 2015." The last time I had a box get sent back to Belgium, it never showed that message. I guess it could still be sent back but "cleared US Customs" seems pretty specific.

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not being argumentative, I'm going to give them a call this afternoon, more so was curious if anyone knows why LAX Customs is taking so much longer to process things than JFK Customs.

I had this exact thing happen with the same note before the box WAS sent back to Belgium. Not saying that's necessarily the case for you.

EDIT: I also had another box come in through JFK and clear immediately with zero issues FWIW.

 

[sliverx]

The USPS tracking tool says "Your item cleared United States Customs at 7:33 am on March 5, 2015." The last time I had a box get sent back to Belgium, it never showed that message. I guess it could still be sent back but "cleared US Customs" seems pretty specific.

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not being argumentative, I'm going to give them a call this afternoon, more so was curious if anyone knows why LAX Customs is taking so much longer to process things than JFK Customs.

There is a strike with the dock workers maybe that's not helping.

 

[kscaldef]

There is a strike with the dock workers maybe that's not helping.

These shipments go by air.

 

[Jonada]

EDIT: I also had another box come in through JFK and clear immediately with zero issues FWIW.

This doesn't really help with the LAX question, but FWIW I also just had a box come through JFK with no issues. Shipped from Belgium on 2/24 and was at my doorstep on 3/3

 

[stupac2]

Also didn't that strike just end? At least that's what I've been hearing about the one up here and I thought it was the same union.

 

[Pneill3161]

The USPS tracking tool says "Your item cleared United States Customs at 7:33 am on March 5, 2015." The last time I had a box get sent back to Belgium, it never showed that message. I guess it could still be sent back but "cleared US Customs" seems pretty specific.

Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not being argumentative, I'm going to give them a call this afternoon, more so was curious if anyone knows why LAX Customs is taking so much longer to process things than JFK Customs.

I've had boxes stay at JFK for up to a month as well, not recently but within the last couple years. Would think its just unlucky when this happen.

 

[Xul1]

I called USPS Tracking and they couldn't give any more specific info than the "cleared customs" that the online tracking provided. Guess I'll see what happens in a day or two.

 

[BusinessSloth]

Be wary. I've had two boxes come in recently that were extremely close full 100% disaster. Bottom on an etre box was soaking wet and nearly falling apart completely. No breakage though surprisingly

Same thing with box 2 but instead the top was almost completely clawed away. Now that I think about how it looked, I'm pretty sure US customs opened that box and did a ****** ****** job of re packing it. Maybe because this person wrote "collectible bottles", and put the value at $400 on the declaration form

 

[Xul1]

Be wary. I've had two boxes come in recently that were extremely close full 100% disaster. Bottom on an etre box was soaking wet and nearly falling apart completely. No breakage though surprisingly

Same thing with box 2 but instead the top was almost completely clawed away. Now that I think about how it looked, I'm pretty sure US customs opened that box and did a ****** ****** job of re packing it. Maybe because this person wrote "collectible bottles", and put the value at $400 on the declaration form

Were those through LAX or JFK? I had an Etre box come through JFK looking like it got skullfucked six ways from Sunday - soaked through, torn up, and with several leaked bottles - but I suspected it was due to freezing rather than customs opening it and poorly repacking.

 

[BusinessSloth]

Were those through LAX or JFK? I had an Etre box come through JFK looking like it got skullfucked six ways from Sunday - soaked through, torn up, and with several leaked bottles - but I suspected it was due to freezing rather than customs opening it and poorly repacking.

JFK. Nothing leaked or froze from what I could see in the bottles.

 

[stupac2]

Be wary. I've had two boxes come in recently that were extremely close full 100% disaster. Bottom on an etre box was soaking wet and nearly falling apart completely. No breakage though surprisingly

Same thing with box 2 but instead the top was almost completely clawed away. Now that I think about how it looked, I'm pretty sure US customs opened that box and did a ****** ****** job of re packing it. Maybe because this person wrote "collectible bottles", and put the value at $400 on the declaration form

Someone, I think it was schwartzoid, had a box come through that was missing the entire bottom. The only thing keeping everything in was a layer of bubble wrap that was held up through magic, I think.

 

[ineedbeer1]

I called USPS Tracking and they couldn't give any more specific info than the "cleared customs" that the online tracking provided. Guess I'll see what happens in a day or two.

I called LAX Customs today about a box that they have been holding since February 10th. They claimed they are not holding it, but that perhaps USPS is since I cannot "ship alcohol to the US." I asked if I could pick the box up and was told no, because shipping alcohol is against USPS regulations. I guess I will try USPS next to see if they will confirm they are holding my box with an intent to ship it back. Customs also stated that the delay is because boxes will sit in bins until USPS has capacity to return the shipment.

 

[schwartzoid]

Someone, I think it was schwartzoid, had a box come through that was missing the entire bottom. The only thing keeping everything in was a layer of bubble wrap that was held up through magic, I think.

That was me. It wasn't the entire bottom, but it definitely was a significant hole. Also had a bottle break which must've destroyed some of the box, but USPS was nice enough to wrap the entire thing in Priority Mail tape (and I mean entirely) and deliver it anyway.

 

[Hookemhops13]

Had this guy show up once. I was scared...

 

[GetchaPull]

That was me. It wasn't the entire bottom, but it definitely was a significant hole. Also had a bottle break which must've destroyed some of the box, but USPS was nice enough to wrap the entire thing in Priority Mail tape (and I mean entirely) and deliver it anyway.

I had a very similar situation, where a bottle broke and instead of Priority tape, they put the entire box inside a heavy duty clear plastic bag. So happy they didn't seize the box and "destroy" the contents.

 

[drbenzo1]

Had this guy show up once. I was scared...