dent
Under Pressure
- Joined
- 20/6/08
- Messages
- 954
- Reaction score
- 467
Danestead - Hop Hog
This review is seriously coloured by having the Feral version here side by side. I don't know where this bottle came from or how old it is, but it was in the magic fridge ready to go. Much opinion follows...
The number one difference between the two is the ferment on the Feral one is clean. The clone is a bit flawed, much like I was saying on the case swap day. It wouldn't stand out so much, but having them side by side really brings it into sharp relief. The clone has a bit of flabbiness in the aroma and flavour. It could be diacetyl, but my palate isn't so refined I can guarantee that's what it is. I get this on some of my brews now and then, I put it down to either oxidation or yeast health/ferment regime or both. This flabbiness seriously detracts from the drinkability when compared to the Feral version. Maybe that is the "body" some others have mentioned - I can't really pick a difference on the dextrins/FG/mouthfeel between the two.
The hop aromatics on the Feral bottle are brighter. The Feral bottle's hop flavour has that "hop sweetness" which I love, and struggle to reproduce on my own APAs and IPAs - the clone lacks this also.
The clone seems a little more minerally, I agree with Nev that less is required.
The Feral is significantly more clear - but not bright. I don't think they filter this beer, and since the clone is on the same quantity of hops it should be just as clear, but it is quite hazy - this points to more process issues that could be refined.
I think in the end I think you have the recipe spot on, it is just the execution that needs some work to make it a complete clone. I'm by no means saying that the clone is shit, it is actually pretty good, but these are the points where it misses the mark. Still one of the best beers of the swap so far.
This review is seriously coloured by having the Feral version here side by side. I don't know where this bottle came from or how old it is, but it was in the magic fridge ready to go. Much opinion follows...
The number one difference between the two is the ferment on the Feral one is clean. The clone is a bit flawed, much like I was saying on the case swap day. It wouldn't stand out so much, but having them side by side really brings it into sharp relief. The clone has a bit of flabbiness in the aroma and flavour. It could be diacetyl, but my palate isn't so refined I can guarantee that's what it is. I get this on some of my brews now and then, I put it down to either oxidation or yeast health/ferment regime or both. This flabbiness seriously detracts from the drinkability when compared to the Feral version. Maybe that is the "body" some others have mentioned - I can't really pick a difference on the dextrins/FG/mouthfeel between the two.
The hop aromatics on the Feral bottle are brighter. The Feral bottle's hop flavour has that "hop sweetness" which I love, and struggle to reproduce on my own APAs and IPAs - the clone lacks this also.
The clone seems a little more minerally, I agree with Nev that less is required.
The Feral is significantly more clear - but not bright. I don't think they filter this beer, and since the clone is on the same quantity of hops it should be just as clear, but it is quite hazy - this points to more process issues that could be refined.
I think in the end I think you have the recipe spot on, it is just the execution that needs some work to make it a complete clone. I'm by no means saying that the clone is shit, it is actually pretty good, but these are the points where it misses the mark. Still one of the best beers of the swap so far.