I Like Lambics: Lindeman’s Gueuze Cuvee Rene

I Like Lambics: Lindeman’s Gueuze Cuvee Rene

Why do bad things happen to good people? Are we spinning aimlessly in an uncaring universe? Do I want beer or wine with dinner?

Through not inconsiderable struggle, I’ve found an answer to one of these eternal questions.

Yesterday, my favorite psychologist and I went to Delilah’s for what was billed as the World’s Largest Lambic Tasting. Lambic, in case (like me, circa 60 days ago) you don’t know, is a Belgian beer made when the wort (solution of grain sugars) lies in open vats in attic “cellars,” exposed to yeasts and other random microbes that float through windows or flutter down from rafters. The result is a “wild fementation,” a concept I love from the get-go, because it yields consistency within chaos, spontaneously and naturally, with little human intervention, as though intended by a higher power to please the palates of humankind.

At Delilah’s, we had several Lindeman’s selections: a 94 (!), 98, 99, and 04. I was knocked out. Although sourness is a flavor we may associate with milk gone bad, the exquisite tartness of these lambics is fine-tuned, pitch perfect musty mouth music.

On the way home, I stopped at Sam’s and picked up a bottle Lindeman’s Gueuze Cuvee Rene (below, click to enlarge) for about $10:



Lambics answer the nagging dilemma of whether to drink of the grape or grain with dinner. What lambics do, at least for me, is balance the lightness and complexity of a wine with the refreshing innocence of beer, as fascinating as many reds but served cool as a white. I find the lambic sourness to be an excellent complement to warm weather foods such as fish, seafood and cheeses – and the full flavors are satisfyingly intense, encouraging slow savoring sips.

It’s what I’m drinking this summer.

So I got that going for me.

Hammond

In the US lambics have long been tarred by association with the strong-flavored fruit lambics (usually cherry-- kriek-- and framboise-- raspberry) which are what you see often here. These can be subtle and beautiful beverages, but too often in America you get one that was made with a cloying fruit concentrate instead of direct contact with real fruit, and the result is somewhat like a fruit-flavored wine cooler, or beer with a jam chaser.

In Belgium we often drank the much harder to find in America peach lambics (peche). Peach, a much subtler flavor, gave hints of fruit to the tart lambic profile, rather than overpowering it with syrupy fruitiness; it's more like the notes of citrus you pick up in a wheat or wit. I'd still only drink it on a summer's day, not in a bar at night where it would seem a bit out of place, but on a picnic it was wonderful. (Okay, I was on my honeymoon at the time, so I wasn't entirely objective at the time.)

I've never been as happy with the peche lambics I've found here (which may support the theory that it had something to do with the time and place I drank them), but the unavailability of really good ones here did inspire me to start making beer myself. (Mind you, it's been years since I looked very hard, so maybe someone can point to a favorite that's now available.) Ironically I soon learned that lambics are something you can't really make well unless you've been doing it for 600 years in a place with the right organisms in the air, but I sure enjoyed all the Irish ales and so on I made besides.

Incidentally, lambic yeasts are supposed to be part of what makes Guinness so good. A little sourness is part of the Guinness brew, although there's debate about how much exactly there is and how it gets in there (some say they pour a bottle of lambic into the tank, others that it might be part of the yeast mix-- which it would be anyway if you poured a sufficiently live bottle in).

Mike G wrote:In the US lambics have long been tarred by association with the strong-flavored fruit lambics (usually cherry-- kriek-- and framboise-- raspberry) which are what you see often here. These can be subtle and beautiful beverages, but too often in America you get one that was made with a cloying fruit concentrate instead of direct contact with real fruit, and the result is somewhat like a fruit-flavored wine cooler, or beer with a jam chaser.

Which brand or brands do you have in mind? The framboise and peach items are to my mind a bit on the sweet side but the sweetness is always countered by the inherent sourness of the lambic. In the case of "kriek", the cherries used are in fact not regular old cherries (in Dutch, kersen) but sour cherries (in Dutch, krieken) and I don't recall ever having a strongly or unmitigatedly or cloyingly sweet kriek. Lindemans is a relatively large scale producer and their basic products are probably not so finely wrought and subtle as those of the smaller producers, but even their kriek doesn't fit to my mind the description of being in any way like "wine-cooler" or "beer with a jam chaser."

In Belgium we often drank the much harder to find in America peach lambics (peche). Peach, a much subtler flavor, gave hints of fruit to the tart lambic profile, rather than overpowering it with syrupy fruitiness; it's more like the notes of citrus you pick up in a wheat or wit. I'd still only drink it on a summer's day, not in a bar at night where it would seem a bit out of place, but on a picnic it was wonderful. (Okay, I was on my honeymoon at the time, so I wasn't entirely objective at the time.)

Kriek, no less than Geuze and Faro or any of the other many specialty beers of Belgium are all eminently appropriate for consumption in a café and, while there aren't many bars in the States that remind me of a good Belgian café, savouring a couple of such beers in the appropriate glass I happily do at a pleasant bar that offers them here.

One of my favourite cafés in Brussels shares its name --Mort subite -- with the brewery that supplies it with its lambic and faro and kriek (I'm not sure exactly what the historical and current business relationships are). A very handsome café, once allegedly a favourite spot for King Albert to visit, Mort subite is a very popular place both for drinking (then, of course, especially the lambic, etc.) and also for light meals. Something I always make a point of doing whenever I get back to Belgium is to go there and have a tartine au plattekeis and a couple of glasses of kriek.

Incidentally, lambic yeasts are supposed to be part of what makes Guinness so good. A little sourness is part of the Guinness brew, although there's debate about how much exactly there is and how it gets in there (some say they pour a bottle of lambic into the tank, others that it might be part of the yeast mix-- which it would be anyway if you poured a sufficiently live bottle in).

Interesting about the Guinness -- I'd like to hear what exactly the connexion is. In Belgium, lambic etc. can only be made in the Pajottenland, a little area just a short ways to the west of Brussels in Vlaams-Brabant (centred on the town of Beersel), for its only there that the appropriate wild yeast-beasts are found.

Antonius

Mike G wrote:Incidentally, lambic yeasts are supposed to be part of what makes Guinness so good. A little sourness is part of the Guinness brew, although there's debate about how much exactly there is and how it gets in there (some say they pour a bottle of lambic into the tank, others that it might be part of the yeast mix-- which it would be anyway if you poured a sufficiently live bottle in).

I'm not sure this is right. Guiness does add about 3% soured beer - its own beer soured with lactobacillus - in versions of their stout. Analysis of the wild yeasts in lambics include brettanomyces, kloekeria, pediococcus, and entrobacteria, in addition, of course, to the typical beer yeast, saccharomyces, but if there's any lactobacillus at all, it's at fairly low levels. While the Belgians are pretty proud of their wild yeasts, I think Guiness, being as big as it is, tends to control things more.

edited to note that, on poking around further, there may be some lactobacillus in some lambics. But lactobacillus is all over the place. And it's still a pretty good bet that the use of lactobacillus in Guiness (which probably started as an accident - just speculating) developed separately from the development of lambics. And certainly none of the other typical Belgian bugggers show up in Guiness.

Lindeman's is clearly the easiest to find brand and I find their krieks and framboises too sweet and, more to the point, just too cherryish or too raspberryish, which is often the result of using something like this, which simply doesn't give you as complex and interesting a flavor as something that has been in direct contact with real fruit, I believe. (All I can say is, I made a "peach lambic" with a peach extract and a packet of live brettanomyces once, and it was one of only two things I threw out before bottling. There's simply more to a true lambic, and a good peche lambic, than that. It's understandable why they do, though, because using real fruit without introducing unwanted microorganisms is not easy.)

I have liked other krieks and framboises than Lindeman's better but, as I said, what I also mainly like is the more recessive fruity character of a peach lambic. A peach lambic is a beer with a taste of peach; a kriek or a framboise is a cherry or raspberry drink with a taste of beer, to my mind. It may just be that my taste for that sweetness and fruitiness in beer is lower than the next guy's (obviously somebody's drinking krieks and framboises in greater quantities than the peche lambics, since they're easier to find).

As for drinking them in cafes, again, I suspect my feelings toward sweetness in beer just mean I look at these things differently. One peche lambic, maybe two, during a sunny picnic on the grounds of the Begijnhof in Bruges is a treasured memory. Four in a row drunk in a smoky bar would start to seem like drinking Smucker's pancake syrup-- to me. (However, speaking of that, maple beer is a wonderful thing, if expensive to make. I keep looking at those big jugs at Costco* and thinking about making it again. Now would be the time to do it because it needs several months to mellow, but by January it would be a wonderful, oaky beverage.)

I'm looking for the Guinness citation. As with many things said about famous beers in the homebrewing community, its connection to actual fact is an open question.

* First "vegetesbians" and now he's looking at big jugs at Costco. Shocking.

As I said, Lindemans (at least with regard to the large-scale production basic beers) is not the best representative of the genre. It's big and cuts corners and I suppose it likely their kriek is pretty sweet (I generally avoid Lindemans basic stuff) -- but any of the better made krieks is not super sweet. It's a sour beer with sour cherries and it needs to be sweetened at least a little. Timmermans is good, Cantillon also very good. I like Mort Subite's product a lot, though I've never had it outside the café of same name in Brussels. Others I can't remember at the moment but will seek out when I get back to Belgium in September.

Kriek should be sweet-sour, not cloying, and the majority of them fit that bill. I have something of an anti-sweet-tooth for the most part and love kriek (though it is a specialty beer and not something one swills on a daily basis). Geuze and faro, rarely seen for sale around here, are especially interesting. The peach and framboise certainly have their place in the world but don't do it for me, though once in a blue moon I'll opt for one.

Antonius

Mike G wrote:I'm looking for the Guinness citation. As with many things said about famous beers in the homebrewing community, its connection to actual fact is an open question.

The 3% number comes from several of Papazian's books (although in later books he modifies it to 3-4%). He also makes reference to the use of lactobacillus. Rogers Park's own Randy Mosher references "the 3 percent factor" using lactobacillus in his latest book, "Radical Brewing."

But the fact that the flavor profiles of some of the other yeasts in Belgians (particularly the "horse-sweat" character commonly associted with Brett) don't show up in Guiness suggests that Guiness is doing something a little sophisticated than just dumping a bottle of lambic into their fermentation tanks.

And, as far as lambics, I don't mind the fruity ones as dessert beers, but plain lambics, or even better, geuezes, give the best unvarnished experiencce.

This afternoon, I was at my daughter’s new apartment, and I brought a celebratory bottle of Lindeman’s Kriek ($9.50). It seemed to be a huge hit with the ladies, but I was disappointed. I obviously expected some sweetness, but was hoping for at least some of the treasured sourness. My conclusion was that Lindeman’s Kriek is perhaps a good example of a standard “flavored” lambic, but not my cup of brew. It did, however, look very pretty in a glass. Later, my 18 year old daughter said she liked it, but that it tasted like cherry soda. On MikeG’s recommendation, I will definitely try the peach, but I believe I prefer the unflavored lambics, which made up the vast majority of those I tried yesterday.

I was reviewing my tasting notes and thought a few bottles worthy of mention. As I said, though, this was my first focused experience with lambics, so please pardon the beginner’s mistakes in assessing relative quality of any of the dozen or so selections I sampled (De gustibus, etc.). Antonious, I’m certain you know way more than I do about this marvelous beverage, and remember that this is from a guy who just “discovered” Hoegaarden (only to discover, just today, that this brand is now owned by Miller Brewing Company).

The very last lambic I tasted yesterday was the Lindeman’s Cassis 2003, which I thought had a very clean fruit taste, yet it was not too sweet (though I tried it after 11 straight lambics, so maybe my palate craved something sweeter at that point).

Of the straight lambics, Hanssen’s Oude Gueuze 2003 also had a “sweet” note, at least to me. The other Hanssen selection was a “mead,” so I wonder if this producer tends toward sweeter lambics.

My least favorite of the day was Cantillon Gueuze Loerik 1998, which struck me as “weak” and “watery.” This was #6 in my tasting excursion; perhaps this brew would have gotten a better reception from me if I had it earlier in the sequence. I saw this bottle at Sam’s for around $20.

The Cantillon Iris (Pure Malt Lambic) 1996, however, was deliciously tart and, I thought, smoky, with a lot of body.

My favorite was Drie Fonteinen Oude Gueuze 2002, #8 in the sequence. This tasty number was “heavy” on the tongue (more dissolved solids?) but in a good way and very tart. Hugely bubbly, which I happen to like, and which provides the mechanical palate enlivening action of a champagne. Refined, yet ready to bring home that funky stuff: the deep and moldy nose that tells you a mile away that this boy is Belgian. On the way home, I also got a bottle of Drie Fonteinen at Sam’s (also $20, which is as much as I’ve ever spent on a bottle of beer). Haven’t tried it yet…though just writing about it starting me to think that I should. Right now.

In my experience, the Cuvee Rene is the best of the Lindemanns lambics. I had a tour of the brewery last year and we got to try their entire product line. Everything other than the Cuvee tended to be sweeter than my palate prefers. The Cuvee may be sweeter than other brands but it can be good with the 1994 batch being exceptional (although may now be beyond its prime).

The cafe named Mort Subite is not owned by the company that produces the beer by the same name. Again, of their products, only the traditional gueueze (IMO) is worth drinking. It's especially good at the cafe in Brussels.

The primary reason the cherry lambics (krieks) have changed over the last couple of years is that the Schaarbeek cherries have all but been wiped out. The lambic brewers have had to locate new cherries that provide similar qualities. Most have settled on a cherry from Poland. One or two small breweries do still manage to get limited quantities of Schaarbeek cherries for some special krieks. If you get a chance to try one try Drie Fontainen's or De Cam's; but you'll need to head to the Pajottenland for them.

Hanssen's does make all of their products traditionally. They prefer a more balanced flavor profile over something very sour. They make a strawberry lambic (Oudbeitje) that is quite interesting. The Mead de Gueuze (lambic & mead) is a blend produced for the US market at the behest of the importer and is not normally available in Belgium.

Cantillon is, perhaps, the second most available brand in the US. They're the only remaining traditional lambic brewery in Brussels. They also have a museum attached so one can tour (and sample) most days of the week. They also have two open brew days each year where one can see the process in action. There's nothing like seeing hot wort entering the coolship and filling the room with steam.

I used to find their lambics quite sour (mostly acetic). I am now finding their products to be less so. This may be because I'm just used to their beers or because Jean VanRoy (the son) is now running things day-to-day and is moving the beers in that direction.

The Loerick product is a special thing. It is an unexpected creation that is caused by a slow refermentation in the bottle. They stick the batch in the back of a caveau (sp?) and cover it with a newly bottled batch. They leave it there for a year and check it again. If still not ready, they hide it again for a year. Once ready, they pull out 1000 bottles and hide the rest. The bottles in the US stores now are the last of the 1998 batch. I have a few left but I think they're now beyond their prime.

Cantillon also has several beers called Lou Pepe and one called Fou'foune (made with apricots) that are quite good.

My favorite lambics are Oud Beersel (now closed and occassionally brewed for the US by Boon), Drie Fontainen (only brewery in Beersel & next to the restaurant of the same name - which is excellent), De Cam, and Girardin. Girardin and Drie Fontainen are available in the US but it's hard to find them and they're not usually cheap. De Cam is very small so a trip to Belgium is required. There's a cafe next door to the blendery that serves both their gueuze and straight lambic.

Joe

jpreiser wrote:Cantillon is, perhaps, the second most available brand in the US. They're the only remaining traditional lambic brewery in Brussels.

Joe, thanks for the very helpful information. What traditional techniques does Cantillon still use that are not used by other breweries? You mention the exposure of the steaming wort, but I have to believe that this is a very common practice, right?

jpreiser wrote:The Loerick product is a special thing. It is an unexpected creation that is caused by a slow refermentation in the bottle...The bottles in the US stores now are the last of the 1998 batch. I have a few left but I think they're now beyond their prime.

The Loerick I had did have the thin vacancy of a beverage that had spent too much time in the bottle. I figured something must be wrong, as the price tag suggested a much higher quality beer.

David

Regarding these beers and food...

The Hop Leaf, of course, is the city's Belgian beer destination.

But I would also like to remind that Bistro Campagne in Lincoln Square has a very fine list of Belgian brews which pair very nicely with some pretty good food.

My wife and I had the opportunity to celebrate our anniversary there last night, and were able to take advantage of the summery weather to enjoy the bistro's splendid, off-street outdoor space. I'll always consider the Hop Leaf a bar serving food, while Bistro Campagne is a restaurant that offers a well-thought out beer menu to complement their cuisine.

I hadn't seen this thread, but I very nearly (in a typical LTH coincidence) ordered the Hanssens Artisanal Oude Gueuze, with which I was previously quite unfamiliar.

You can view the menus at their website: http://bistrocampagne.com/

Very nice place, good food, great beer.

Cheers,

Aaron

David Hammond wrote:

jpreiser wrote:Cantillon is, perhaps, the second most available brand in the US. They're the only remaining traditional lambic brewery in Brussels.

Joe, thanks for the very helpful information. What traditional techniques does Cantillon still use that are not used by other breweries? You mention the exposure of the steaming wort, but I have to believe that this is a very common practice, right?

I wasn't trying to imply that Cantillon was much different in their process than other brewers, I was trying to say that they're just the only one in Brussels. Belle Vue, IIRC, used to brew in Brussels and, while excellent at one time, is now swettened and commercial. If you can ever find a bottle of Belle Vue Selection Lambic, try it. It was the unsweetened lambic that they'd only bottle a limited amount of before making their main products.

The other traditional brewers/blenders all use the old processes (turbid mash, coolships, wood barrel fermentation & aging, blending, refermentation in the bottle). Some have modernized their equipment a bit and some have installed cooling systems in the aging rooms to limit growth of undesired characteristics (for their house profile). While not traditional, it can reduce loss due to spoilage and speeds up the maturation since the undesired properties don't have to be aged or blended out.

The true purpose of the coolship was, wait for it, to cool the wort. One can make sour or "clean" beers when using one. Before refrigeration, nearly every brewery in the world used some form of open-air cooling whether a coolship or a bordeleau (sp?), if not both. To this day, Zum Uerige in Duesseldorf still uses a them, and their beers aren't sour by any means. It has remained part of the (traditional) lambic making process. I'm sure the open cooling permits versions of brewers yeast (S. cerevisiae) and some wild yeast and/or bacteria to settle on the cooling wort, but I speculate that most of the other microorganisms (Brettanomyces, Pediococcus, and a couple dozen others) that make lambics what they are reside predominantly in the wood barrels.

One other thing many people might not be aware of... Many of the traditional lambic makers left don't actually brew; or, only brew a portion of the lambic used to make their finished product. They blend other people's lambic. There are three brewers that still sell their wort to blenders: Girardin, Lindemans, and Boon. The blenders age the product at their site and then blend barrels in various quantities to obtain their house profile. Girardin only recently (in lambic history) began blending and releasing their own product. They used to only sell to the blenders. Both Drie Fontainen and De Cam (brews at Drie Fontainen) do brew some of their own lambic but it's not much in comparison to what they get from the others.

Joe

Joe:

Thanks for the detailed information. With regard to the blending, one of the problems these days -- as I understand it in any event -- is that a lot of the lambic derivatives are made with only a little lambic. Consequently, some beers that are called geuze and kriek etc. do not have the sour but complex base that the traditional varieties had.

I moved to Belgium (Vlaams-Brabant) in 1980 and started drinking these beers soon after arrival. I feel pretty certain that the basic trend has been to make those that should have a sweet element ever sweeter, in some cases really losing the sweet-sour balance that was so interesting to me. As David says, there is a real appeal for many of the very sweet items such as Lindemans Framboise and once in a blue moon, as a sort of dessert beer (as nr706 aptly says), I too can understand the appeal.

But now to kriek, I suspect kriek is a product that has really undergone quite a bit of a change in basic taste profile, at least among the big producers. As I mentioned elsewhere, krieken are specifically sour cherries (and as you added, the traditional variety used were the dark Schaarbeekse krieken). Of course, Schaarbeek is hardly an agricultural centre these days but, as you say (something I hadn't thought about till reading your post), the native krieken in Brabant are not sufficient to fulfill the needs (and budgets) of all the brewers and I read now that the cherries are increasingly imported from Germany and Denmark and now also Poland. Thanks for bringing that issue to my attention. But still I wonder to what degree the change in the 'cherry' used is responsible for the change from 'very tart with a sweet edge' to 'very sweet with a tart edge' and to what degree it has to do with other short-cutting/cost-lowering measures (e.g., syrup instead of real fruit, less lambic used).

Anyway, good kriek should not to my mind ever be describable with the word 'sweet' and luckily, there are still some makers who get it right.

Mort Subite's kriek was still pretty good a few years ago when I was last at the café of same name. With a nice slab of bread and butter and some plattekeis, scallions and rammenas, hard to beat. I'll report back on the current quality of this combo after my next visit in September, inshaallah.

***

David:

Thanks for starting this thread on a swell family of beverages.

About Hoegaarden, you say it's been bought by Miller, which is a surprise to me -- are you certain? Hoegaarden had been (like so many small breweries in Belgium) been gobbled up by the behemoth Interbrew (which grew out of the long expansive Stella-Artois of Leuven -- I lived next door to their main brewery for 2 years plus). Anyway, Interbrew is surely horrible at some level but they also leave some measure of independence to the small specialty brewers that assures a measure of continuity with regard to quality that one doesn't typically see with Bud and Miller buy-outs (this is especially so, I'm sure, with the products intended first and foremost for the native Belgian audience).

There is a Hoegaarden knock-off that I thought belonged to Miller, namely Celis (small brewery started by former Hoegaarden brewmaster who moved to Texas, made great beer for a while, then sold the business and name to Miller). Blue Moon is the Coors correlate; as is virtually always the case with American interpretations of Belgian beer varieites, it's overwrought (the 'more is better' philosophy).

I can't remember if I mentioned this once here or whether it was in the Land of Leff (no final -e), but whenever talk turns to the witbier of Hoegaarden I'm inclined to wax poetic and nostalgic about the town of Hoegaarden and the surrounding area, just a little east of Leuven and right on the language boundary. For anyone who visits Belgium and has time to get out into the country, this area is a very beautiful and interesting part of the country.

***

One of the things I like about traditonal lambic is its flatness and one of the things I like about geuze is its liveliness; it also has a nice bitter edge alongside the sour element. Faro is not so common and was the original (I believe) of the sweetened lambics. I agree with Mike G that the pêche beer is more interesting than the framboise but what I'm really waiting for is the witloof beer.



Antonius

Antonius wrote:About Hoegaarden, you say it's been bought by Miller, which is a surprise to me -- are you certain? Hoegaarden had been (like so many small breweries in Belgium) been gobbled up by the behemoth Interbrew (which grew out of the long expansive Stella-Artois of Leuven -- I lived next door to their main brewery for 2 years plus). Anyway, Interbrew is surely horrible at some level but they also leave some measure of independence to the small specialty brewers that assures a measure of continuity with regard to quality that one doesn't typically see with Bud and Miller buy-outs (this is especially so, I'm sure, with the products intended first and foremost for the native Belgian audience).

A,

I checked my source (http://www.wisinfo.com/postcrescent/news/beerman/beer_7279628.shtml) and admit to some confusion caused by this passage:

“This Hoegaarden of 2002 was nothing like the memory of Hoegaarden circa 1990.

Modern Hoegaarden was the work of Pieter Celis, who in 1966 reopened the brewery in Hoegaarden that had closed in 1957. After the Interbrew purchase, Celis moved to Texas where he opened the Celis microbrewery and made another version of Hoegaarden called Celis White.

Then Miller Brewing in 1995 bought a majority interest in the brewery. In April 2000 Miller bought full title to the company and on Dec. 31, 2000, Miller closed Celis.”

I believe I misinterpreted here, thinking that “majority interest in the brewery” meant the Hoegaarden brewery. Probably, however, it’s the Celis brewery, as you suggest. But you're right, the "quality" should have been the giveaway that Hoegaarden is not a Miller product line.

Hammond

H:

The Celis beer from Texas was really quite good; the only Belgianoid beer from the States I've ever had that really tasted like its Belgian counterpart. That is, perhaps, not surprising, given the fact that the Hoegaarden brewmaster was the one making the Texas witbier but still, it was nice to have such a quality beer at a non-import price and, incidentally, at a time when Hoegaarden itself (i.e., the Interbrew-owned Hoegaarden) wasn't all that broadly available here.

In the link you provide, Mr. Beerman says that he found the 2002 Interbrew Hoegaarden not at all up to his memory of an early 1990's Hoegaarden made under Celis' direction. I've heard a few other people say the same thing. Well, I drank Hoegaarden made under Celis' direction a lot in the course of the 1980's, especially in the summers and it was wonderful. I also drank it through the 1990's both here and over there. Perhaps the Interbrew product has slipped somewhat but I do not detect the sort of collapse of quality that some claim and think it might in part be a psychologically induced phenomenon. Anyway, even if it has slipped, it is still a delicious and refreshing beer.

There are lots of Hoegaarden knock-offs made in Belgium nowadays, some of them are really very well-made and delicious. Brugse Wit is one that comes immediately to mind that I've had and enjoyed (at the moment others' names aren't coming to me) but I think it worth trying whatever ones you come across. That said, I'm happy to have Hoegaarden -- Interbrew-owned or not -- available for consumption here. It still has a level of restraint and subtlety that American imitations seem to spurn in favour of a more 'in-your-face' flavouring.

Antonius

Yes, Miller bought Celis and then closed it in 2000. Probably they had nothing to do with Hoegarden at all.

Celis branded beers are now being made in Michigan. Not sure if I've tried them since that happened.

It's great that I found this group recently and that David started a thread on my favorite topic (beer, Belgian beer, and, most importantly, lambic).

Antonius wrote:Joe:

Thanks for the detailed information. With regard to the blending, one of the problems these days -- as I understand it in any event -- is that a lot of the lambic derivatives are made with only a little lambic. Consequently, some beers that are called geuze and kriek etc. do not have the sour but complex base that the traditional varieties had.

I moved to Belgium (Vlaams-Brabant) in 1980 and started drinking these beers soon after arrival. I feel pretty certain that the basic trend has been to make those that should have a sweet element ever sweeter, in some cases really losing the sweet-sour balance that was so interesting to me. As David says, there is a real appeal for many of the very sweet items such as Lindemans Framboise and once in a blue moon, as a sort of dessert beer (as nr706 aptly says), I too can understand the appeal.

I don't believe the breweries and blenders I visited last year are limiting how much lambic is in their final product. However, except Lindemans, all of them make products that are quite tart (although balanced in their own way). Lindemans, and even Morte Subite (who is brewing an even sweeter product), are doing what they have to to stay in business (read below).

One of the things I learned during the last trip is that Europe is having a hard time maintaining some of their beer and wine drinking culture. Many people are railing against alcohol consumption which has led to people drinking less and enforcement of drinking-age laws (although I don't believe Belgium has one...yet). Also, with the availability of Coca Cola and other soft drinks, many young folks aren't learning how to drink anything else; especially something that isn't sweet (i.e. sour of bitter). As one person told me, humans inately like sweetness; if they aren't exposed to bitter or sour, they never learn to like those flavors.


Antonius & others:

I also recommend checking out the Hoegaarden area if the chance presents itself.

The Celis beer being made in Michigan is the same recipe as the original. The brewery bought the label from Miller a couple of years ago. I haven't had a chance to try it recently though.

While it may no longer be available, I also had Celis White in Belgium a couple of years ago. I discovered that Piere Celis was having it contract brewed for him there.

Two witbiers that I enjoy are Unibroue's Blanche De Chambly and Allagash White. The latter has some issues, but is quite good as long as you rouse the yeast from the bottle (as one should do with a witbier). If on draft, it's really only good when the keg's been inverted until just before serving (as instructed).

For other local Belgian-style beers, although more of the abbey style, check out Ommegang's beers. The brewery is located in Cooperstown, NY, and is now wholly owned by Duvel-USA.

***

I also like the effervescence of gueuze. I usually open a bottle for my New Year's toast instead of Champagne (or sparkling wine). The side benefit is that most people don't like it so there's more for me.

Lambic, which is traditionally flat, is also wonderful to drink. Firstly, the lack of carbonation makes it very easy to just drink. No gassiness to deal with. It's also nice to try various ages (1-, 2-, or 3-years old). You really get an idea of how the beer changes as it matures. The 3-year is almost like a flat gueuze. The younger products are cloudy, often bitter, and may or may not be very sour. It's usually only drunk by the older folks.

Faro is indeed the commercial sweetening of lambic. Originally, the beer was served von 't vat (from the cask) and people would used a muddler to mix in sugar to their personal taste. Afterwards, the blender (or the cafe) began making a pre-sweetened product. Only two (Boon & Lindemans) companies, IIRC, still make faro.

Joe

jpreiser wrote:My favorite lambics are Oud Beersel (now closed and occassionally brewed for the US by Boon)

Joe,

I'm also a fan of Oud Beersel. Do you know if the bottles at Sam's and Binny's is being produced by Boon, or are they left over from the original brewery? I think they stopped production 2 or 3 years ago, so I suppose the lambics could have been aging for this time?

(I've looked on the bottles, but haven't seen any mention of Boon.)


Tim

pancake wrote:Joe,

I'm also a fan of Oud Beersel. Do you know if the bottles at Sam's and Binny's is being produced by Boon, or are they left over from the original brewery? I think they stopped production 2 or 3 years ago, so I suppose the lambics could have been aging for this time?

(I've looked on the bottles, but haven't seen any mention of Boon.)


Tim

Tim,

Boon isn't listing his name on the newer bottles. He basically bought the blendery to keep one of the big (and crappy) guys from taking it over and ruining the brand before discontinuing it (as was Eylenbosch, among others). Whenever he makes a batch, it's to the Oud Beersel recipe and process which differs from Boon's in some manner he wouldn't talk about so I think it's viewed as a separate brand.

I think the bottles currently available were made after the old place closed (and hence by Boon). I have a few bottles I bought before they closed and those taste different from some purchased recently.

They're not bad; just different. At around $5 a 375ml bottle, the price isn't too bad.

Joe

While shopping at Whole Foods the other weekend I noticed that they were carrying Lindemann's Kriek and Framboise - and at a significantly cheaper price than I'd paid at Sam's for the same product in the past. (Like, $9 per bottle, as opposed to the $13-$14 I'd paid before.)

Both versions had the cork & cap closure that I'd been used to, but the Whole Foods version was lacking the white paper wrapper that completely enclosed the bottle, and the label was clearly intended for an English speaking audience. While studying the label I noticed something else - it was labeled as... a malt liquor product. The contents were significantly sweeter than I remembered the other product being in the past, as well.

Was I duped? Was I sold some fruity Alcho-pop as beer? The only other thing I could think of was that they were forced to label lambics as malt liquor due to the unique fermentation process.

Does anyone have any insight?

Pete wrote:Both versions had the cork & cap closure that I'd been used to, but the Whole Foods version was lacking the white paper wrapper that completely enclosed the bottle, and the label was clearly intended for an English speaking audience. While studying the label I noticed something else - it was labeled as... a malt liquor product. The contents were significantly sweeter than I remembered the other product being in the past, as well.

Was I duped? Was I sold some fruity Alcho-pop as beer? The only other thing I could think of was that they were forced to label lambics as malt liquor due to the unique fermentation process.

Does anyone have any insight?

I don't recall Lindemans beers ever being wrapped in paper. Liefmans beers are though. The names are similar but they're completely different beers. Lindemans is in the Pajottenland and makes lambic while Liefmans is in East Flanders and makes Flanders Brown ales. Although, I usually only get the Cuvee Rene which isn't in paper so I could be wrong.

As far as beers in the US being labelled as something they're not, that has to do with the wierd liquor laws some states have. Beers over a certain ABV must be called Ale, or Bock, or Malt Liquor even if they're a lager, a Belgian-style, or contain no cereal adjunct. It's purely how much alcohol is in the product and has nothing to do with origin, style, or brewing process.

Joe

I'm pretty sure Joe is right about the use of the label 'Malt Liquor' -- a function of alcohol content, not directly brewing method or ingredients.

I don't know if you would agree with this, Joe, but I strongly suspect that Lindemans, for its "alcho-pop" products (nice term, Pete!) uses only a small amount of lambic, actual wild fermented beer. That would keep cost down, help get the commercially desired sweet flavour profile, but legally allow them to say that the beers are flavoured 'lambics' . I think I heard something to this effect but can't remember the details any more (probably due to drinking too much Duvel or Palm).

Antonius

Drie Fonteinen Oude Gueuze, 2001

I mentioned in a previous post (http://lthforum.com/bb/viewtopic.php?p=34341#34341) that the Drie Fonteinen Oude Gueuze 2002 stood out at last Saturday’s tasting. Last night, I popped a 2001 that I had purchased at Sam’s.

At Delilah’s, we tasted the lambics in what I believe were approximately 3 oz. juice glasses: utilitarian, but somehow wrong. Truth be told, I’m not sure what the regulation glass is for a lambic, so I went with a wine balloon. Perhaps I should have gone with a thinner mouth, but I just don’t have experience with this stuff. If any of you more savvy lambic-o-philes have guidance here, I’d love to hear it.

The Drie Fonteinen was very cloudy and totally translucent (not transparent), a rich caramel color with somewhat fewer bubbles than expected (the bottle warned that the contents were under extreme pressure, so I was ready for a champagne-type bubble blast).

As I sipped it, I felt that I was drinking a very active beverage: the yeasts are living, of course, but the golden beaker felt alive in a way that I don’t usually experience even with wine (or maybe just the wine I drink). As I drank, I wondered if, as when tasting wine, there is any advantage to swirling the lambic in the glass – I concluded that there probably wasn’t.

The flavors I got from this lambic were green apples and camembert – which I guess makes sense, in that it’s a sour brew with hints of delicious mold and scrumptious rot. Sour and tart, it didn’t have an acidic burn, but rather a clean and well-defined tang, very pleasant and refreshing, especially on a hot night.

I believe the old school division of the tongue into different flavor areas is now in dispute…but let me tell you, when I let the liquor splash over the back sides of the tongue (the traditional location of sour sensors), I felt the sharp slap of sourness vibrate through my whole head.

I had a chunk of Cotswold cheese, so I ate a little of that but found that it blunted my palate to the power of the brew (kind of like if you drink milk and then eat hot peppers; you’ve insulated the heat receptors and so get less heat; I felt something like that was at work here).

The Drie Fonteinen is one tasty lambic, and it whetted my appetite for more.

Usually, my beers come in smaller bottles…and there’s something very satisfying about having a 750 ml of beer (to share, of course).

Hammond

David Hammond wrote:
At Delilah’s, we tasted the lambics in what I believe were approximately 3 oz. juice glasses: utilitarian, but somehow wrong. Truth be told, I’m not sure what the regulation glass is for a lambic, so I went with a wine balloon. Perhaps I should have gone with a thinner mouth, but I just don’t have experience with this stuff. If any of you more savvy lambic-o-philes have guidance here, I’d love to hear it.

The Drie Fonteinen was very cloudy and totally translucent (not transparent), a rich caramel color with somewhat fewer bubbles than expected (the bottle warned that the contents were under extreme pressure, so I was ready for a champagne-type bubble blast).

A traditional gueuze/lambic glass is similar in shape to a US-style pint glass (a.k.a. a sleeve). They're just smaller. They usually hold just shy of 375ml (12oz). It's nice because a 750ml bottle then holds two servings. Some of the glasses are "sided" rather than smooth and round but that's usually for disctinction & decoration. They are really quite plain (or utilitarian).

The fruit lambics will generally be served in a fancier glass; usually one that's footed (such as a flute, a balloon, or a snifter)

It may be a silly question, but when you poured the beer, did you decant it off the lees or did you just pour out of the bottle, perhaps several times? Lambics, being bottle conditioned, have yeast in them that will settle out over time. Unlike champagne/sparkling wine, the yeast hasn't been disgorged.

Bottles that have been moved recently will recently be cloudy. It's been my experience that the folks at Sam's will be a little rough with things (as far as not rousing yeast) at the register. I've even had them pack things upside down just to get them in as few boxes as possible.

If possible, let the bottle sit quietly for a couple days (or weeks/months/years) before opening. Maintain the same orientation when chilling. Once opened, pour gently into two or more glasses until the sediment is just making its way to the lip. This should leave a couple of ounces in the bottle but it will be very cloudy, even muddy.

I will usually swirl the dregs and drink them. There's nothing much more than yeast (vitamin B) and lambic in it. It does taste differently than the clear portion so I don't like to mix the two. Doctors even used to prescribe lambic, including the dregs, for certain ailments.

There are special baskets for serving lambics that hold the bottle on an angle so the yeast doesn't get shaken up between glasses. I've only seen the baskets for sale in Belgium though.

Use of the basket is especially important if the beer has been stored on its side. Laying the bottles down is becoming less necessary since most of the producers are now using champagne-style corks with wire bails instead of in-bottle corks which needed to be kept wet. I still lay down some of the bottles I want to age for a long time and will use the basket for them since I don't wan't to hold the bottle until it's empty (especially if I'm drinking it all myself).

Joe

First things first...

Happy Saint Médard (of Noyon) Day (8 June)! If it rains today, we're in trouble...

A nice Walloon saying appropriate to the day and to this thread as well:

Saint Mèdå grand pihå, fez beûre li pôve come li ritchå.

'Saint Medard, great pisser, let the poor man drink like the rich.'

David Hammond wrote:At Delilah’s, we tasted the lambics in what I believe were approximately 3 oz. juice glasses: utilitarian, but somehow wrong. Truth be told, I’m not sure what the regulation glass is for a lambic, so I went with a wine balloon. Perhaps I should have gone with a thinner mouth, but I just don’t have experience with this stuff. If any of you more savvy lambic-o-philes have guidance here, I’d love to hear it...

Of course, in Belgium each brewer has glasses specifically designed for the beers he produces, so whenever possible one should go with the brewer's glass or something like it. In general, lambiek and geuze are drunk from either tumbler-like glasses or short-stemmed glasses with broad bellies (I'm sort of making up my own glass terminology here) but mouths that aren't much narrower than the belly and thus fairly wide. The fruit-flavoured beers tend these days to get matched with pseudo-champagne glasses -- short to medium length stem and medium to long narrow body with a fairly narrow mouth. If memory is serving me well, the glasses used at Mort Subite have a medium length stem and a good sized body with very broad open mouth, rather like the glasses made for some of the Trappist and other abbey beers. For geuze and lambic, in the absence of the brewer's suggested form, I'd just go with a good sized glass (tumbler-style) with a broad mouth. Otherwise, if you come across one of those boxed sets that are sometimes available from one of the abbey breweries, I think one of those (e.g. such as a Westmalle glass) would do nicely.

Usually, my beers come in smaller bottles…and there’s something very satisfying about having a 750 ml of beer (to share, of course).

Sharing is (sometimes) overrated.



Antonius

jpreiser wrote:It may be a silly question, but when you poured the beer, did you decant it off the lees or did you just pour out of the bottle, perhaps several times? Lambics, being bottle conditioned, have yeast in them that will settle out over time. Unlike champagne/sparkling wine, the yeast hasn't been disgorged.

....

I will usually swirl the dregs and drink them. There's nothing much more than yeast (vitamin B) and lambic in it. It does taste differently than the clear portion so I don't like to mix the two. Doctors even used to prescribe lambic, including the dregs, for certain ailments.

Joe,

At this point on my learning curve, I cannot imagine what a silly question would be?

No (and perhaps it was silly of me) I didn't decant the beer. Never occurred to me. I just poured it out of the bottle, several times. I can’t say I noticed any debris in there at all, though at Delilah’s I think I did see some Drie Fonteinen bottles with very discernable sludge on the side (indicating the bottles were stored on their sides, I guess). I kept my bottle upright in the refrigerator for over 3 days before uncorking, so perhaps some of the lees just settled and I never noticed them and just disposed of them when I disposed of the bottle.

Do you think drinking the lees with the liquor is a bad idea? I understand that they taste different, but aren’t they all part of the same pungent “package”?

Hammond

David Hammond wrote:
Do you think drinking the lees with the liquor is a bad idea? I understand that they taste different, but aren’t they all part of the same pungent “package”?

Hammond

In Belgium, the beer is always decanted off the lees (note exception below). The goal is to leave the sediment behind without leaving too much beer. This permits one to sample the beer in it's true form. Drinking the dregs is usually done serparately, if at all.

I won't fault anyone if they like drinking it all at once, but I strive for "proper" pours to savor it before downing the dregs.

BTW, this is how one serves homebrew or other bottle-conditioned beers with the exception styles such as witbier or weissbier. (i.e. decant off the lees)

Joe

I was also at Delilah’s on Saturday but must have just missed David (after he left he won 2 Belle-Vue Framboise glasses, which I accepted for him). It’s interesting that I tasted almost a totally different selection than he did. Unfortunately it was impossible to sample more than a small fraction of what was available. There were certainly some remarkable beers.

Mike G wrote:In the US lambics have long been tarred by association with the strong-flavored fruit lambics (usually cherry-- kriek-- and framboise-- raspberry) which are what you see often here. These can be subtle and beautiful beverages, but too often in America you get one that was made with a cloying fruit concentrate instead of direct contact with real fruit, and the result is somewhat like a fruit-flavored wine cooler, or beer with a jam chaser.

I, too, am not a huge fan of some of the sweeter mass-produced fruit beers but if you simply avoid Lindeman’s and especially Chapeau (brewed by De Troch) you’ll improve your odds greatly. In Chicago it’s not terribly hard to find superlative examples from smaller producers like Boon, Cantillon, and De Ranke (a newer brewery). The Map Room, Hop Leaf, Binny’s, and Sam’s will have all three and many more. At Delilah’s, I reconfirmed my taste for kriek over framboise. Even a framboise from a topnotch artisanal producer such as Frank Boon didn’t seem as “right” as most krieks.

Mike G wrote: In Belgium we often drank the much harder to find in America peach lambics (peche).

I have to say I haven’t been overly impressed with the peach lambics I’ve had in the past (though they probably weren’t top examples). On Saturday there were 4 versions, including a keg-aged Lindeman’s from 2000, as well as one currently on tap (Lindeman’s?) but unfortunately I didn’t try any. One beer that amazed me on Saturday was an apricot lambic so I’m probably due to reassess the peach situation. Cantillon Fou’ Foune 2000 is a turbid orangish liquid that seems to glow in the glass. It’s shockingly tart (even by lambic standards) with a perfectly integrated subtle apricot presence. I would never have guessed an apricot beer could be so good.

David Hammond wrote:Lambics answer the nagging dilemma of whether to drink of the grape or grain with dinner.

Did you get to try any of the grape lambics? Cantillon, one of the great brewers of Belgium, was well represented (I count 23 of their beers on the list). I’d had their Vigneronne (flavored with Italian Muscat grapes) before but never heard of St Lamvinus, made with Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon! More than a curiosity, it was an excellent brew. Along the same lines was Drie Fonteinen Malviosia di Sepia.

jpreiser wrote:Girardin and Drie Fontainen are available in the US but it's hard to find them and they're not usually cheap.

They had Girardin 1882 Gueuze from '99 and '01 (I sampled one and liked it a lot) as well as an '03 Kriek (very good). Drie Fontainen was represented by 5 years of Oude Gueuze (1999-2003) in addition to Malviosia di Sepia.

As if nearly 100 beers wasn’t enough, Saturday also saw the gathering of some fine scooters at Delilah’s. Here are a couple pictures from the street outside the bar. Check out the sidecar on that Vespa!

I was at Sam's today and only had a moment or two to see what they had but there were several krieks and framboises, and even a couple of non-Lindeman peches. Drie Fontanen, Cantillon, Boon, Liefmans and many other smaller brands were represented, even if Lindemans had the primo shelf space. Incidentally, I noticed a number of them made a point of saying they were brewed from real fruit, which I would say does not rule out the use of concentrate (which after all comes from real fruit, once upon a time).

I also saw that they had lots of Gouden Carolus (an ale with a Christmas-themed label, not sure why) and the 2005 vintage (as it were) of Gouden Carolus Grand Cru of the Emperor. I note that quantity because about a year ago they had about half as much and when my friend Scott was finished stocking his cart they had absolutely none at all. I brought the Grand Cru to one of the Asian meals about a year ago (I managed to talk him out of one bottle) and it went really well with spicy food, a rich, espressoish ale.

jpreiser wrote:In Belgium, the beer is always decanted off the lees (note exception below). The goal is to leave the sediment behind without leaving too much beer. This permits one to sample the beer in it's true form. Drinking the dregs is usually done serparately, if at all.

I won't fault anyone if they like drinking it all at once, but I strive for "proper" pours to savor it before downing the dregs.

BTW, this is how one serves homebrew or other bottle-conditioned beers with the exception styles such as witbier or weissbier. (i.e. decant off the lees)

Joe

Joe,

One of the reasons it maybe didn't occur to me to decant the lambic was that at the Kendall College Belgian beer tasting of a few weeks ago, as well as at Delilah's, there was no decanting to be seen (not surprising, I guess, given the crowds that were to be served). Also, some of the lambics have some carbonation, and I would tend to not decant anything with bubbles. That said, I'll decant the next time I have lambic (which should be soon; I'm stopping at Binny's this afternoon).

Hammond