Variation in bottled beers
April 3, 2006 – 9:43 pmDo you think there is more variation between different bottles of the same beer or different glasses of this beer when it’s on tap? I can think of reasons why either might have more variation. Usually bottled beer gets shipped around more than a keg of beer that’s on tap. It goes from the brewery to a truck to a store of some type and then to my house. Or maybe to a restaurant or bar. A keg makes almost as many stops, usually one or two fewer though. Maybe that makes a difference, I don’t know.
But then the kegs may have greater variation because the final result might depend on how the keg is tapped and under what conditions it’s served. Different bars or restaurants have slightly different serving arrangements, and maybe this would introduce variation from which a bottle would be immune.
The reason I thought about this is because I had a bottle of Guinness Draught tonight, and it was not as smooth as it usually is. Given, I find the bottled Guinness to be a little rougher than it’s on-tap brethren, but this bottle seemed to be especially strongly carbonated. I still enjoyed it. It tasted great, like usual. But it tasted different enough for me to notice.
And I also notice that Miller High Life or Pabst Blue Ribbon exhibit extremely little variation amongst a given mode of transport (be it bottles, kegs, or cans). Why would I be able to identify variations within different Guinnesses more easily than I could within these cheap domestic beers? Maybe it’s because the cheap domestic beers are so homogeneous to begin with that there’s little room for variation.
Or maybe I’m just an idiot.
6 Responses to “Variation in bottled beers”
I would expect bottles/cans to be less consistent than kegs. First, let’s say a keg is ~200 beers. So, between 2 kegs you might get a little difference, but compare that to ~400 bottles/cans and you get a much greater probability of things being different (on the brewing/bottling end).
Second, I would say that the post-bottling keg is more resistant to differing conditions than a post-bottling bottle. It’s an issue of surface area to volume ratio. Bottles have more surface area per unit volume, so they will “feel” changes better than kegs. (Assuming my logic is right in that the ratio of surface area to volume is different. Is that right Jeff?)
Finally, bottles tend to pass through more hands or come from a larger variety of sources than kegs. You generally get kegs from a distributor, with only a few distributors per region. Bottles, however, tend to go all over the place to different supermarkets, liquor stores, etc. The more hands that things pass through, the more likely they are to pick up changes.
By adam on Apr 4, 2006
Interesting, but consider this: Bottles are pasteurized and filled with preservatives to stay fresh. The don’t do that with keg beer, so that’s why you have to keep the keg cold: from the brewery all the way to your party. That’s why keg beer tastes better, but it’s also why it’s easier for keg beer to go wrong.
By gv on Apr 4, 2006
That didn’t happen to be one of the guinness’s that was in the freezer to get chilled quickly? One which partially froze before being put back in the fridge? Yeah, that might have something to do with it.
By gv on Apr 4, 2006
As far as the PBR variation, versus variation in other beers, I think there is definitely a trade-off between making great-tasting beer that really needs to be enjoyed fresh, or making homogenized beer that can survive anything.
By gv on Apr 4, 2006
Ah, you know, I hadn’t even thought about the Guinness that had sat too long in the freezer. That may very well have something to do with this.
And point taken about the PBR. That gets me thinking…I wonder what the worst conditions are that a beer has survived to later be drunk. Sitting in the trunk of someone’s car for a week in the middle of the summer? I can’t really come up with much else that would be as bad as that.
By jjk on Apr 4, 2006
The absolute worst that can happen to a beer (without going to extremes) is for it to sit in a hot car, then to cool it again, then heat it again (rinse, repeat, and eventually drink). The more “annealing” cycles that it goes through, the worse off it is. This is more damaging to some beers (Shiner) than it is to others (Bud Light). But the end result is never good. Freezing it can also have an effect, although it should be less than heating, taste-wise. However, there’s also the chance of your beer exploding if left in the freezer for too long.
By adam on Apr 4, 2006