Dogfish Head Punkin Ale – a vertical tasting
Okay, let me start out by saying that I am not a fan of aging beer. Like, at all. I believe that beer is at its best the moment the brewer decides that it’s ready for drinking; it can really only go downhill from there. That being said, I do find the aging of beer to be an interesting topic for discussion, hence this post.
First of all, what characteristics make a beer appropriate for aging? Well, if it’s a style that emphasizes hops, don’t expect it to stay that way. The alpha and beta acids in hops that are responsible for the bittering and hop flavor/aroma are volatile and will break down over time. An aged hoppy beer will be thrown out of balance as much of the bitterness and hop character will be gone.
Maltier beers on the other hand can stand up well over time, especially if they’ve got a fairly high ABV. The malt and alcohol notes tend to smooth out with aging, which can produce some nice results (if you’re into that sort of thing).
Beers that are heavy on spices also can mellow and smooth out with aging. Take for example Dogfish Head Punkin Ale, my most favorite pumpkin ale. I pick up a case every year, and had saved one bottle from 2008. I was interested in seeing how it changed over the last year, and so, here is a vertical tasting of Dogfish Head Punkin Ale – 2008 vs. 2009.
The beer. A full-bodied brown ale brewed with real pumpkin, brown sugar, allspice, cinnamon and nutmeg. 7.0% ABV, 28 IBU.
Appearance. You can tell from the picture that there is a visible difference between the two bottles. The 2008 (left) is darker and murkier, while the 2009 (right) has a brighter, clearer orange hue. Both pour with a fluffy white head, though the 2008 has better head retention.
Aroma. The aroma is more pronounced in the 2009. It smells bright, crisp, lightly malty, with prominent spice character. The 2008 has a deeper malty aroma with subtle spice, and it has a bold fruitiness to it. Almost a green apple aroma.
Mouthfeel. The 2008 feels smoother and creamier. The 2009 is more effervescent and bubbly. As it warms and some of the CO2 dissipates, the champagne-like quality of the 2009 goes away, leaving it much smoother.
Flavor. The 2008 tastes malty, with a slight alcohol note. It tastes richer and fruitier than the 2009. A green apple character is definitely present, which increases as it warms. The 2009 is also malty, but it tastes lighter and brighter. The spices are there in the 2008, but they’re much more prominent in the 2009. The spice in the 2009 almost tastes harsh in comparison.
Overall. The 2008 is definitely smoother and way more fruity. The spices are much more present in the 2009, which I prefer for this beer. The 2009 just tastes brighter, fresher, and more alive with flavor. For Dogfish Head Punkin Ale, younger is definitely better. 2009 wins!
7 Comments to “Dogfish Head Punkin Ale – a vertical tasting”
Leave a Reply
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Steph Weber and Chesco Cuisine, RateBeer Hop Press. RateBeer Hop Press said: Fresh off the Press Dogfish Head Punkin Ale – a vertical tasting http://bit.ly/5CikGW [...]
I’m with you – aged beers just aren’t my thing. Beer should be fresh! And seasonal!
Good job on comparing the two, however. I was able to try DFH Punkin for the first time this year, good stuff.
Cheers!
I dunno. With extremely hoppy beers laying them down can bring out character that would otherwise be masked by intense bitterness (although I love intense bitterness!
), especially if thay have a good malt body to back up the big hops in the first place – which they probably should to avoid it being hop juice (mmmm, hop juice).
I’m thinking in particular of a 2007 Sierra Nevada Bigfoot that I drank in October 2008. It was really delicious, and that intense bitterness that you get with a fresh one had mellowed to create a really well rounded drink. So impressed was I, I was inspired to make my own that December and have kept most of it for a year, opening a bottle every couple of months to see how it’s changing (10.5%, 106 IBUs). I think it’s getting better!
(you can ask your fellow HopPress blogger Mark Dredge for his opinion)
Having read a little about some of the beers made in country houses in Britain in centuries past, it sounds like this is what they did too.
But yes, often it’s why wait? Now is always a good time
Funny you should talk about aging, pumpkin beers, and aging pumpkin beers. I proudly possess what one friend dubbed The Malt Vault where I put A) beer suitable for aging or B) beer that doesn’t fit in my overfull chiller. Sometimes ones from the B group erroneously get pushed back into the depths. Such was the case with my Alpine Brewing Ichabod Pumpkin Ale from 2008. So I pulled it out to pour during Thanksgiving. It’s classified as a Dunkelweizen with pumpkin, nutmeg, and I think cinnamon, but only 5% abv. I never had it fresh, but let’s just say, it ain’t “cellerable.” It’s entirely possible there’s a DFH Punk’in somewhere back there, too. I better fish out anything under 7%.
I believe it was Michael Jackson that said “If you see a beer, do it a favor and drink it.”
and who am I to disagree with him! I do however age a lot of lambic and sour beer, and I simply can not resist stashing some of the seasonal beer to build a vertical. Currently, Spaten Octoberfest and SNCA are aging for a vertical. Good write up Steph.
I actually really do seem to like Punkin with 6 months to a year of age on it. I was a bit disappointed with the 08 batch though. I thought this years batch was a bit to dry (low residual sweetness) for my tastes, but a bit of an improvement to lasts year’s beer. That said, I think 2006 was probably my favorite year.
[...] said it before and I’ll say it again: I am not a fan of aging beer. So, why another vertical tasting [...]