stats:
BS: Imperial Stout, 60 IBU’s, 8.3% abv, Grand Rapids, Michigan,
$4 (12 oz)
KBS: bourbon barrel aged Imperial Stout, 70 IBU’s, 11.2%
abv, Grand Rapids, Michigan, $6 - $8 (12 oz)
As winter gently sets in, every opening of the fridge
reminds me that I have a small stockpile of beer for which the weather is
becoming most appropriate. They are all dark and heavy, and most of them have
been aged in whisk(e)y casks. A few of their non-oak-aged counterparts are in
the mix, which will make for good comparisons.
The phenomenon of oak aging beer primarily started in the
American craft brewing scene with the use bourbon barrels in the early to mid
90’s. After a slow start followed by a decade or so of steady growth, the
popularity (and production) of barrel aged beers has really taken off in recent
years. And while beer can be found slumbering in casks that formerly held
almost anything, from wine to rum to calvados to Grand Marnier, the majority of
aging is still done in whisk(e)y casks.
Of course there is more to it than simply putting any beer
in a random cask – I’ve definitely tasted a few barrel aged beers that fell
short of the mark. Beer style, former cask contents, number of times the cask
has been used, and how long the beer will be aged are all important factors.
There is definitely an art to the process.
I’m going to start off with one of the early success stories
of bourbon barrel aged beer – Founders Kentucky Breakfast Stout. I also have
the non-aged Founders Breakfast Stout to taste, but it appears that these are
two different beers - the KBS is not simply Breakfast Stout which has been
barrel aged.
The Breakfast Stout is described as a “double chocolate
coffee oatmeal stout”. The KBS may have changed recently, as the current
website description is “an imperial stout brewed with a massive amount of
coffee and chocolates, then cave-aged in oak bourbon barrels for an entire
year”, but a previous description found online calls it a “strong stout brewed
with a hint of coffee and vanilla then aged in oak bourbon barrels”
BS
appearance: black and thick
nose: full, pungent and sweet at the same time, chocolate
milk and gentle espresso.
palate: the mouth-feel is rich and thick, but not
cumbersome. good complexity with nicely evolving flavors. the coffee is obvious
but not overdone and well balanced by the dense malty flavors. interesting
interplay of bitterness from the hops, coffee and chocolate. the enduring
finish fades off very slowly.
KBS
appearance: blacker and more viscous looking when pouring
nose: intriguing, chocolate and vanilla, but it has a unique
quality that I can’t quite put my finger on.
palate: extremely dense and rich, the Breakfast Stout almost
seems watery in comparison. the flavors explode in a massive blast and continue
on in a sustained attack. syrupy chocolate, vanilla, oak, gentle spice. the
flavors evolve and mingle playfully through the long, smooth finish.
As I’ve been writing and drinking slowly the beer has warmed
up, and it seems more comfortable closer to room temp than fridge temp.
Each of these is actually a great beer in its own right. It
feels like an “apples to oranges” comparison - the KBS does things that the BS
is simply not capable of, but that doesn’t really take anything away from the
greatness of the Breakfast Stout. With the BS you get the roasty, toasty nature
as its dominant feature, whereas the KBS is defined by a thick sweetness that
is only kept in check by a chorus of elements that are able to act as a counterbalance.
1 comment:
Man! Can't get enough of these whiskey-aged beers! I'll certainly be on the lookout for KBS!
Post a Comment