Recently, I’ve bought a couple beers that explicitly told me not to cellar them. Pliny the Elder from Russian River and 13th Anniversary Ale from Stone are the two that I’m thinking of specifically. On the bottle, they make it seem shameful that one even has the idea to cellar their products.
What do these beers have in common? I believe that the hop factor is the real answer. It is semi-understandable that they want their product to have the fresh hoppiness that they intended when making it. Hop acids degrade over time, so their essential oils break down and recede. On the other hand, the practice of increasing hops in a beer was originally intended to lengthen the life of the beer. Hops are a preservative and antiseptic. So I want to make myself clear when I say that whether or not you cellar a beer is a matter of preference, provided the beer fits the criteria of being cellarable. It is extremely annoying to me when the manufacturer tells me to do this or that with their beer.
I’ve been cellaring beer for about 5 or 6 years now and know how they can blossom over time. All these IPAs with Cascade hops become tiresome after a while. They are ubiquitous, predictable, and quotidian at this point. Far more interesting to me is what these beers may become over time. So, the prohibition is baffling to me. I would think that brewers might encourage people to age their beers and even perceive it to be not unlike a fine wine. Can you imagine someone saying in 2019, “This is a 2008 Pliny the Elder?” I can.
As a matter of fact, I’ve had beers that have been aged/I have been aging for 5 or 10 years. In fact, they were hoppy beers that turned into something quite different and quite wonderful. Drinking 1999 Lees Harvest Ale and Fuller’s 2004 Vintage Ale this year were major highlights. Good thing I don’t always do what I’m told. Do you?
Yes, please don’t tell me how to handle my beer. I will handle it the way I want. Basically, it stays in my cellar until I want to drink it, period. For me personally, I tend to not cellar IPA’s I like the hops and want to taste them.
I saw that “Notice” on the Stone 13th Anniversary bottle and wrote that in my review of the beer. I would age the beer, just because it says not to, but quite frankly there wasn’t much I liked about the beer to have it take up shelf space…
[Reply]
I like to “calm down” some IPAs. I know the fresh hops are the reason they say it…but you never know what will happen and I intend to find out.
[Reply]
Let me be the dissenting voice here. It is one thing for ABINBEV to tell me how to drink their beer but if Russian River and Stone tell me? Then I listen. This is their product. They will know more about it than me every day of the week. My question back to you is, quite a few breweries put the recommended glassware on the label. Do you ignore that too?
[Reply]
Thank you for the dissenting opinion, Sean. I really mean it when I say that. I want to address the issues that you raised. I’m answering you with my honest thoughts and have not one intention to be rude when I respond. I hope that it is not perceived that way.
I don’t ignore glass ware suggestions/recommendations. Although it is telling that they are called recommendations. For one, certain glasses release aromas and qualities certain ways and that is always a static characteristic. A glass always acts the same no matter how old the glass is. Beer is not that way. It is an organic product that changes over time and evolves into (many times) something better; thus, it is dynamic.
The truth is that there are two preferences that you are using in your argument. One, you have a preference for Stone and Russian River over Bud (I think that this is correct). However, your preference to listen to a more respectable brewer over another is just that; preferential. The respect that you hold in that regard dictates the credence that you give to what they said.
Second, there is the preference of the people making the beer. It is simply preference. To me, it seems a bit like saying, if you want to drink the product as best we intended it, then drink it fresh. But to preclude cellaring it on that basis is to put intent into some irrevocable law for the beer. The verbiage and matter-of-factness behind the statement was my problem. Who knows what a cellared version might taste like…they never will. The only point I was trying to get across is that preference is exactly that, let’s not make it a dictum.
I want to be perfectly clear that I almost always buy a nicer beer to try and one of the same to cellar. There is a lot to miss out on if one doesn’t do this. All that to say that I actually do take the suggestion in one very real sense. Let me also state something that I think will clarify what I think drives my attitude toward this. IPAs as an historic style (this is why I posted the linke) were actually meant to lengthen the life of the beer for shipping, not hop it up for the flavor. But intent changed over time. Now, why isn’t Russian River or Stone sticking to that historical intent? Again, I can’t help but see preference at work here. If we really wanted to be contentious about it we could appeal to the idea that British Brewers know more about the style, so that should dictate our rendering of IPA. We don’t do that…and I’m glad. It is iconoclasm that created Pliny the Elder. It’s ok if we participate in it, too. Isn’t it?
[Reply]
For what it’s worth, I’d prefer a note like the following:
“X key characteristic of this beer will fade over time, diverging from our intended effect. To enjoy this beer as designed, drink promptly; to discover more about Y and Z characteristics of this beer, cellar for a few years’
[Reply]
That might be nice on a label. That’s the point I’m driving at…tell us about the beer but don’t insist on X. Very aptly stated.
[Reply]