Additional notes and pictured from 06/04/23

Wow, my notes below are pretty scathing from almost exactly 18 years ago!

I still don’t think this beer is a great example of the style, and I still don’t really love it, but it’s better than that first ‘review’ would have me believe.

Pour is slightly on the darker orange side of things, and it pours better than previously. Also its not as thin as I first recorded, nor is it as sickly sweet.

Now feels a lot maltier than before.

Original notes 06/05/05

Not bad, but way too sweet for a Tripel in my opinion. This is coming from a man who generally likes malty, sweet beers, but this seemed to abandon the style slightly.

Golden hue, but huge amounts of nasty looking yeasty sediment still entered the glass despite the careful pour. Not good looking stuff either, it sort of half floated, half sank, quite unappetizing. A bit thin, a bit too orange orverall. Head was not thick enough, and was lost way too soon and was really quite poor. No billowing creamy dense white head that I have come to expect from this style.

Sweetness (not in a good way) dominated the beer. Alcohol and dry ending that should have been present were just not there in sufficient or lingering enough quantities. No spice at all detected.

Thin, sugary mouthfeel, not good.

Poor Tripel in my opinion, very surprising for this consistently good brewery. However, good enough to be decently drinkable.