Audience Participation: You Say Tomato, I Say Tomato

After a long night at the Stone Release Party at Maduro last night, I've come to the conclusion that there are essentially two types of people in the universe. Those like me, and those not like me. Which seems a bit obvious, and perhaps I should explain a little.

Part way through the evening, the guys from Stone broke out some of the "good stuff" for us to sample – a Stone XI, a Double Bastard, a Russian Imperial, an Old Guardian. It was during the tasting of the XI that I began to realize that some people are like me, and others are not. If you've never had the XI, it's not like anything you've had before; it is a testament to Stone that they have many beers for which you could say that. We tasted it before we knew what it was, and I had guessed that it was a super-hopped up stout – it was dark and smooth with some roasty notes and lots and lots of hops, it was missing the body of a stout, particularly a Stone stout, but it otherwise fit into a notion of something that seemed similar to a stout to me. Everyone seemed equally confounded by it, but we all really liked it. Of course, Stone calls it a Black IPA and when we read that on the label we all immediately said "What?" Then we said "Oh. That makes sense."

But, the bigger point is this: how do you sell these things, these beers, that really kind of defy any sort of typical classification system. I've found that there are two responses to this: 1) it is what is, you just describe it, and the consumer trusts the brewery that it is brewed with quality; 2) you find comparisons that are a close fit and shoe-horn the description into something a bit more familiar. And, before you accuse me of slobbering on Stone again (or, how did Chris say? Tonguing the kernels of the corn in their shit?) there are a number of American, even Wisconsin, breweries that are making these beers that don't fit neatly into categories: Furthermore's Makeweight comes to mind immediately, many of Tyranena's Brewer's Gone Wild Series, some of New Glarus' Unplugged stuff.

Anyway. I subscribe to theory #2. Many others subscribe to theory #1. My argument for this shoe-horning is less for my own benefit than an argument for the average person who approaches these beers. A person who probably does not have the beer-vocabulary to get at what a Black IPA might be, or have the industry knowledge to implicitly trust Stone. So under my theory you could argue that this thing is a bit like a stout, creamy and roasted, crossed with an Imperial IPA, super-hoppy. Taking two categories that a person would be familiar with, and using them to shoe-horn the beer into expectations. Because, really, a beer that is "a nice blend of intense hop flavors, hop bitterness and roasted malt notes" could also describe the Central Waters Glacial Trail IPA, which is a very, very different beer.

Of course, the counter-argument is: it is what it is, the consumer needn't have any expectations when the bottle is opened. Trust the brewery and decide if you like it. If you like it, work backwards from that.

So. Where do you, assuming there is a "you" out there, stand on this? Do you see something and trust the brewery and make a determination if you like it? Or do you seek to form some sort of pre-drinking expectation based on the familiar? There is also the recognition that these are not exactly mutually exclusive positions; you can make sure those that approach a bottle under theory #2 have some basis for comparison by effectively using the language on the bottles to convey those comparisons, but those that subscribe to theory #1 could just refrain from the reading the bottle.

By the way, and I don't know if I'm supposed to mention this or not, but I figure if you've read this far that I'd throw you a bone, there may be a slight chance that the Stone XI will have the same fate as the Stone V. But you didn't hear it from me.

Audience Participation: The Feasibility of the BrewBar

I was talking with some people yesterday and we were trying to think of a bar (not brewpub/restaurant) that brewed its own beer.

Can you think of any brewpubs that don't serve any food and don't distribute? Need not be Wisconsin-only. Bagged snacks are OK, but no re-heated pizzas (Ale Asylum) or dining rooms (The Great Dane). So, a bar that brews its own beer.

Off of the top of my head, I can think of three here in Wisconsin. Rowland's Calumet Brewery in Chilton. Although, to be fair, Rowland's does distribute kegs in the 30 mile radius around Chilton. The other is StoneFly in Milwaukee – although apparently even they opened a kitchen back in November. It does look like Silver Creek Brewery in Cedarburg is drink only – although, I could swear they had food, some questioning reminds me that maybe it was just popcorn (OK under our standards). So, of those three, only one actually fits our requirements.

If you were starting a brewery and did not want to distribute, but did not want to deal with the headache of food, what do you need? Live music seems a must. Probably a pool table. Maybe some TVs in the corner? Or, you know, make it like a bar. And sell your own beer. Silver Creek goes with other beers on tap just to provide some diversity. It would be interesting if this theory were challenged and a bar could only serve its own beer (although, I think, technically, that you have to have at least one non-brewery beer on tap under the current brewing laws – even The Great Dane sells Miller Lite if you ask for it).

Why do you think this is? Why don't more bars just have their own 7 barrel brewing systems? I mean, yeah, it seems kind of inefficient and risky if you don't know what you are doing. But back in the late mid and late 1800s, many bars also brewed their own beers; refrigeration issues made it difficult to keg anything, so the beers would have been served out of fermenters/conditioning tanks, which would have been kept cool in a basement, or, if you were lucky, a cave.

Anti-tied-house laws prevent distributing breweries from having their own bars. Maybe because there isn't enough money it? Most brewers think bigger scale? Anyway. A strange phenomenon.

Audience Participation: Lifting the Couch Cushions and Looking Under the Driver’s Seat

Who knew there was such a thing as "premium" light beer? Or, more precisely, who knew that Miller Lite is considered a "premium" anything?! But, it's still an interesting question.

Given the economic downturn, and beer's status (particularly craft beer's) as a luxury item, will people start turning to beers like Busch Light, Old Milwaukee and Milwaukee's Best instead of drinking Dogfish Head 120 by the case? According to Miller Brewing's henchman over at Ye Olde Brew Blog, "wide price gaps can encourage people to trade down."

Currently, the going price for a six of New Glarus Seasonal seems to be around $7.99; a case of the stuff will set you back a cool $32. Compare that with $17.49 for a 30-pack of Busch Light. A price gap of $14.50. The price gap between Miller Lite, a "premium light beer," and Busch Light, presumably not a "premium light beer," is $4.33, up from only $3.94 a year ago; and Miller is worried about defectors.

So, is a widening a price gap going to make you change your beer drinking habits? If not, what price reducing tactics, if any, do you intend to take?

Here at MBR we're hoping to get more free beer.

By the way, who determines whether a beer is, or is not, a "premium" light beer? (That's a serious question. If you know the answer or have a marketing data sheet breaking down beer into such categories, I'd love to see them.)

Audience Participation - Random Beer

I'm going to keep at this until we actually get some audience participation here.

So, what's the best or worst random beer you've had? A beer that you've ended up getting at the store because the retail help recommended it and was right or very very wrong. Or, beer that someone brought because they know you like beer that either hit the spot or completely missed the mark.

My interest was piqued on the first grilling day of the year yesterday. We went to Brennan's to pick up some stuff to throw on the grill and while there we got some beer. While I was at the car, the other person came out with a beer that the beer guy had told her was a "good brunch beer." What qualified that for a grilled steak dinner is beyond me, but it was under his recommendation.

It was the El Toro William Jones Wheat Ale. (BA. RB.) It was actually all right - not about to make me give up hope for the recommendations at Brennan's. A run-of-the-mill American Wheat Ale. Unfortunately, we're kind of spoiled in Wisconsin, and the wheat ales available from our own in-state breweries outshine this every day of the week.

So, what's the best, or worst, random beer you've had?

Audience Participation - Surprises

What places have had the most suprising tap (or bottle) lists, either good or bad?

I was out at Tyrol Basin, in Mount Horeb, late last week and their tap list is suprisingly strong: 2 New Glarus (Spotted Cow and Fat Squirrel), Capitol Maibock, Hopalicious, and the left field entry of Great Lakes' Edmund Fitzgerald. Not to mention the half a dozen expected macros on tap. I was pleasantly suprised not only at the quality of the taps, but the Edmund Fitzgerald is an awesome non-local, craft selection; they easily could have chosen something like Sierra Nevada or Sam Adams. The bottle choice was a little bland, but with that stuff on tap, who needs bottles? And while I didn't have one, the Bloody Mary's look awesome.

In the suprisingly bad category, is Queen Anne's at the Westside Club; only two selections Coors Light and Labatt's. As I think I've mentioned before, I'm a sucker for Labatt's, but still - only two beer selections at a supper club serving a pretty good fish fry? And, Coors Light? I would have expected at least Miller Light.