What Makes Megaswill Just So Crap?

[Julez]

Julez you aint wrong, but you are missing the point. They have their own free will to choose, its just that they cannot see the full market. The main philosophy of advertising is to condition consumers minds that what they associate with in the advert is the best thing for them. For the average Australian they see these brilliant commercial advertisements and select the product accordingly. Its not rocket science. With the mass produced beer, they see they want. They are conditioned to that beer. They see the "premium" brands - eg Crown Lager and say "this costs more, it must be better". They are happy with their choices. Its only when they find there really is a better choice do they become homebrewers.

And I wiill say, there is nothing wrong with megaswell. It's just not my first choice of tipple for all of us here on this site.

Agree with all your comment! Didn't miss the point though, just trying to demonstrate that it's a bit mad to assume just because you and I like something, that everyone who likes something else is wrong! As the saying goes, ignorance is bliss - we all have different realities! The marketing is only the bait, it is not the be-all and end-all. The punters still like the product.

 

[boingk]

Right on - I mean, its still technically beer. And there aren't any bad beers, just some that are better than others. I'll rag on my mates at uni for drinking cruisers or ordering vodka rasberrys at the bar, but couldn't care less if one chooses a Tooheys/VB/XXXX/Carlton over a CPA/LCPA/Stella/Red Oak. At least they aren't drinking an alcoholic soda...wait...

 

[schooey]

Buy a schooner of Megaswil, and a schooner of Coopers..

Leave them in the sun for 1/2Hr

Now sample both...one is drinkable...the other will make you gag...

The sunlight has some sort of affect on MegaBeers...

I'd say it's more to do with the temperature. Is there anything on Earth as revolting as warmed-up megaswill?

The temperature will, if it gets really hot, but that 'skunky flavour' is due to the UV, or photooxidation..

Beer photooxidation (lightstruck reaction) creates the well-known intensely flavor-active compound 3-methyl-2-butene-1-thiol (3M2B1T). The sensory threshold for 3M2B1T is 1.25 to 4.4 ng/L in beer. The chemistry of the formation of 3M2B1T is known. The pathway involves photo-degradation of isoalpha-acids to form 3-methyl-2-butenyl radicals, which in turn combine with sulfydryl radicals produced from the photo-degradation of a sulfur-containing source such as amino acids. Using solid-phase microextraction and GC-olfactometry, we discovered two previously unidentified compounds of the 3M2B1T family in lightstruck beer. The aromas of the two compounds are indistinguishable from the "skunky" or "foxy" aroma used to describe 3M2B1T. One of the two compounds was tentatively identified by mass spectroscopy as methyl (3-methyl-2-butenyl)-disulfide. The major ion fragments of the other compound have been identified (m/z 41, 69, 101, and 115) but the compound structure has not been elucidated. This study contributes to the understanding of beer photooxidation, showing that three compounds rather than one are responsible for beer's lightstruck aroma.

:blink: Takes some re-reading hey?

2. Pride of Ringwood hops. Breweries use it because they can get the maximum bitterness for the minimum amount of ingredient, due to it's high bitterness. It also helps cover up the thinness of the can sugar mentioned above. The problem is it's bitterness comes at the expence of flavour.

Nothing wrong with POR, it has it's place... <_<

 

[geoffi]

Right on - I mean, its still technically beer. And there aren't any bad beers, just some that are better than others. I'll rag on my mates at uni for drinking cruisers or ordering vodka rasberrys at the bar, but couldn't care less if one chooses a Tooheys/VB/XXXX/Carlton over a CPA/LCPA/Stella/Red Oak. At least they aren't drinking an alcoholic soda...wait...

Only problem with that is that while ever bland megaswill dominates the market, it will be cheap(ish) and the good stuff that we all prefer will be dear.

So I for one would be very happy to see a big swing away from kegged cat's piss to high-quality beer.

But I ain't holdin' my breath...

 

[geoffi]

As for the temp vs UV thing, of course if you leave the stuff in the sun, it will be transformed into an even viler concoction than it is normally.

But even without UV exposure, warming it will unleash its full satanic potential.

 

[ibast]

"The hops is used to hide how low the malt level is."

Don't know that I necessarily agree with this. If anything, more hops mutes the maltiness even more. I.e. if they wanted to hide how little malt flavour there was, you would think they would try to accentuate it by DECREASING the hops.

I +1 to the idea that the hops profiles they use are to portray local beer as being "strong" (tough, etc.) when in fact it is (in relative terms) very light flavoured. Like has been mentioned, the hops levels they use are apparently quite low (i.e. rarely above 25, 26) but it dominates the taste profile due to the low maltiness.

I think their base malt levels are low. They make up the alcohol with adjuncts. As for Belgium beers being high in adjuncts, well there are two reasons they can get away with it. Firstly they have a high level of malt before they add the adjuncts, secondly their high final alcohol levels add to mouth feel.

With the low level of alcohol in Australian beers they need all the malt they can get to get good mouth feel and maltiness.

A good beer has a good balance of malt and hops. But Australian beers are so low in malt that if you hoped them to the right level they would be very tasteless. Think Amsterdam Marina beer. I think most people on this forum would agree this a very bland beer.

So to disguise this blandness the major breweries compensate by adding hops flavour. So whilst they are not high in bitterness, they still have too much hop flavour for the malt structure.

As for POR hops, you probably can make a good beer from it, but I think on the average Australian grown POR, grown for the big two and used the way the big two use it, is not a good hop.

 

[dr K]

oh dear..

I think their base malt levels are low. They make up the alcohol with adjuncts. As for Belgium beers being high in adjuncts, well there are two reasons they can get away with it. Firstly they have a high level of malt before they add the adjuncts, secondly their high final alcohol levels add to mouth feel.

So what do Australian MS beers have before they add adjuncts.???
The use of Candy Sugar and such in Belg Beer is to to lighten the mouthfeel, to dry the beer out.

With the low level of alcohol in Australian beers they need all the malt they can get to get good mouth feel and maltiness.

What happened to the High ABV mouthfeel statement?? And to top that, it is thought by some (see above) that the malt levels are low anyway.

A good beer has a good balance of malt and hops. But Australian beers are so low in malt that if you hoped them to the right level they would be very tasteless. Think Amsterdam Marina beer. I think most people on this forum would agree this a very bland beer.

No arugument about the balance of malt and hops ...I was under the impression though that in order for a beer to be balanced then as the malt level increased so should the hops, thus hopping up would increase the bitterness (at the boil point) or the aroma (at the late stage). So what then is the right level of hop (IBU, Aroma whatever) for a lowly malted beer?? And does an increase in hopping make it more tasteless, or more balanced....

So to disguise this blandness the major breweries compensate by adding hops flavour. So whilst they are not high in bitterness, they still have too much hop flavour for the malt structure.

I do not work in or for and do not know the process of adding hop flavour, in fact I am at a loss to even describe what "hop flavor" is.
My personal notes from the big megas would be that they all have an easy drinking balance, some have a more robust hop character than others but absolutely none, zero, have too much hop flavour.

K

 

[sponge]

Impressive... i came back after uni to look at if anything had been said and a nice few pages popped up. Interesting read too. Just thought id tell a little story to back up the whole "aussies have grown up on it and dont know better"

I was talking to my uni mates about homebrewing, and one of them asked me if it was better then VB?


I said yes, well.... hopefully, or else i fail at life

Then a few of them asked what it tasted like. Trying to explain how aromatic and hop flavoured beers, and as has been stated many times before, beer made with malt instead of sugar (even if its just LME, sorry AG kids , fingers crossed ill get there), was pretty hard.

Theyre coming over in a few weeks for pre-drinks before heading out for my bday, but I have a feeling that with them being so accustomed to megaswill, they wont like homebrew all that much. Luckily i havent brewerd an IPA to show them or else theyd probably never get back into homebrewing


But I have to agree with a lot of people, its crap because they dont know about the better beers. They see whats on all the taps around the locals and drink that (VB, new... etc... ) They enjoy it, its their choice, but god dammit im trying to help them in the right direction haha



Cheers, Sponge

 

[boingk]

ibast - whathehellyoutalkinbout?

The level of alcohol in Australian beers isn't low, rather it is comparably low when compared to classically stronger brews. It is considered full strength generally, being over 4.5%.

Also, alcohol DOES NOT contribute to mouth feel, rather, it strips it away. This is because alcohol is much less dense than water or malt extract. The body and moutfeel of a brew are contributed by the residual solids from the malt extract and any other adjuncts added to the brew [ie: maltodextrin, lactose].

Additionally, a beers amount of hopping is always relative to the amount of malt character it has. ie: more malt character = more hopping required to make a balanced beer. I would argue that for the most part Australian beers are either only slightly underhopped, or quite underhopped/bittered with little aroma or flavour.

Furthermore, breweries make no attempt to disguise the 'low malt levels' of their brews by adding hop flavouring as this would have the opposite effect: one would be drinking hop flavoured, mildly alcoholic carbonated water instead of the balanced product we call beer. They add low bittering levels to apease the market and even less flavouring and aroma so that it can be "bolted down fast" - the way the market demands.

Meandering on some more I'll tell you that its not a low malt level per se that makes a beer taste watery, rather it is the use of certain yeasts/enzymes/adjuncts to lower the final gravity of a brew. This has several effects: it reduces mouth feel. It increases alcohol. It robs the beer of malt character.

Lastly, POR is fantastic for classic Ausralian-style bittering, but crap for anything else. Thats what it was developed for - a bittering hop with high alpha acids so that it may save the breweries a buck on buying hops.

You did get one thing right however: adjuncts other than malt are added to the brews to increase alcohol content, produce a lighter bodied beer [in the case of simple sugars such as glucose or sucrose], save cost to the brewery and increase profit.

Goddamn.... - boingk

 

[PostModern]

$35-40 is cheap for 24 bottles? :huh:

3 bottles for $11 (Boags Draught/Tasman Bitter) is cheaper than 1 bottle for $15 (Chimay). Just ask my Mrs

 

[sponge]

Just a question about this.... I went to dan murphys and just grabbed sum aussie beers i hadnt tasted before. Got a few ipas, ales, lagers, wheat beer, etc... And noticed that they all seemed to be less carbonated then megaswills. Well im really only comparing this to getting a tap beer from the local, which seems to have a lot of CO2 bubbles buzzing around in the beers (schooner), but at home, they dont seem to have anywhere near as many (also drank from a schooner). I cant compare them side by side because i dont have any megaswill in the fridge (i know... my parents are more wine/scotch drinkers then beer drinkers, so we dont often have any) so im only running off memory

 

[the_fuzz]

As for POR hops, you probably can make a good beer from it, but I think on the average Australian grown POR, grown for the big two and used the way the big two use it, is not a good hop.

Who are the big 2 that use POR?

1 = CUB

but who is the other? Or, as per everything else to have said, do you just think something - so it must be true <_<

 

[dr K]

but who is the other? Or, as per everything else to have said, do you just think something - so it must be true

seems to be a rather consistent thread in the fabric

K

 

[Thirsty Boy]

When you say CUB no longer use hops, what do you mean?
Many CUB beers are hopped with pellets and even late hopped, and being very familiar with the hop industry, I can tell you they sell a lot of hops to the breweries.
For example Cascade Premium is late hopped with (I think) Tassie hersbrucker. Their (crap tasting) carbon-neutral fad Cascade green is hopped with very nice Galaxy hops. Cascade first harvest use this year a new, unnamed cultivar for flavour and aroma.
Best to be specific and not generalise one's experience from one or a few beers to the industry in general.

MFS.

Sorry - I wasn't being as clear as I thought I was. Certainly you are right and many CUB/Fosters beers do indeed use actual hops in pellet form. I don't make Cascade premium, but the Prem Light IS late hopped, with Hallertau - from Germany. Or at least thats what the label on the box says.

BUT - the big "megaswill" culprits from the CUB side, use extract only. Thats what I was getting at.

ibast - although you are almost certainly unconvincable. You are also mostly some distance from being totally right. Just as one example - guess what... there isn't any attempt whatsoever being made to cover up the lack of maltiness in our beer - none - we actually use the adjunct to deliberately dilute the maltiness, we even tailor the malt itself to not be too "malty" because when you make malty beers in Australia, no one likes them. You also don't seem to know the difference between hop flavour and bitterness. The vast majority of Aussie mega beers have no hop flavour at all. And they aren't very bitter. So even if we were trying to "hide" the lack of malt in the beer with hop flavour, we are apparently failing dismally. The beers are patently not hoppy and also not malty - exactly as they are intended to be.

You seem to think that the product we produce is the result of a lack of care, or quality of process, or quality of ingredients. Sorry mate, but if you personally put in 10% of the effort to ensuring those things in your beer, that we do in ours, you are a rare bird indeed. It takes a hell of a lot of effort and some pretty damn dedicated and talented brewers to make the "megaswill" that has been so maligned (by me too remember) in this thread.

Make no mistake - that beer is the way it is as a result of extreme attention to quality, of both ingredients and method. It tastes exactly the way it is intended to taste; and that taste is carefully designed to please the palates of the majority of beer drinkers in Australia.

If its not to your taste - fair enough, its not to mine either. But to think its because of bad brewing ... sorry, but I am personally insulted. You don't know what you are talking about.

And as for everybody assuming that people haven't got enough of a handle on their own preferences that they have somehow been "tricked" by marketing into liking these sorts of beers.... just how much smarter and better than 90% of the rest of the population do you think you are?? Seriously its just rampant arrogance and elitism. People drink what they do because thats what they prefer, not because they are too dumb to know better. Jeezus.

I like craft beer - I like Homebrew - I like a lot of great imported Beer - I dislike many domestic mega brews: Surely thats good enough?? why does there have to be a series of conspiracies and vile hidden motives behind it? Are people so frightened of being different that they need to spout rubbish in order to prove that while they are in the minority they are still nonetheless "right"

If you must come up with fantasies that are insulting to the people who actually brew the beer you are talking about, at least try to get your facts right, it would make a pleasant change.

Drink the beer you enjoy, hate the beer you hate and leave the other 9 in 10 people to do the same. Me personally, I'm going to have a homebrew, cause thats what I prefer and I need a drink after this thread.

Thirsty

 

[Thirsty Boy]

Just a question about this.... I went to dan murphys and just grabbed sum aussie beers i hadnt tasted before. Got a few ipas, ales, lagers, wheat beer, etc... And noticed that they all seemed to be less carbonated then megaswills. Well im really only comparing this to getting a tap beer from the local, which seems to have a lot of CO2 bubbles buzzing around in the beers (schooner), but at home, they dont seem to have anywhere near as many (also drank from a schooner). I cant compare them side by side because i dont have any megaswill in the fridge (i know... my parents are more wine/scotch drinkers then beer drinkers, so we dont often have any) so im only running off memory

Sponge,

A lot of mega lagers are highly carbonated to help dispell the watery mouthfeel that their lack of malt character leaves. The bubbles give the beer a more full and creamy texture in the mouth, but then when you swallow... there are none of the thick, lingering, cloying attributes that a beer with a natively full body or high maltiness might have.

The other beers you had most likely didn't need that helping hand to stop them feeling watery in your mouth. Although wheat beers are usually pretty highly carbonated for just the same reason....

TB

 

[SpillsMostOfIt]

I *can* enjoy a Carlton Draft out of a well-maintained tap if necessary. Having plummeted down the slippery slope of craft beer, I usually prefer not to.

Others in this thread (and occasionally in others that crop up from time to time) have drawn analogies between the Australian megabeers and food from the golden arches, etc. Others again have spoken about commercial success and critical acclaim. There are not too many Australian products that have achieved such commercial success overseas as the dreaded Fosters Lager. If you are prepared to ignore the current marketing conspiracy theory as to why that might be, perhaps it is not just Australian palates that are wrong, but also those of a large number of people overseas.

Australian car companies cannot achieve success like this (are you a Holden or a Ford man?) - not too many Australian manufacturing industries can (or at least none that come to my mind atm).

So, I would argue that Australian *professional* brewers can be proud of what they do.

Imagine how uniformly good homebrew would be if every homebrewer were as critical of their own beer as some are of the professionals'...

Edit: language dickheadery.

 

[ibast]

i
Additionally, a beers amount of hopping is always relative to the amount of malt character it has. ie: more malt character = more hopping required to make a balanced beer. I would argue that for the most part Australian beers are either only slightly underhopped, or quite underhopped/bittered with little aroma or flavour.

The thread is not "why is megaswill good?" but "why is it crap". My answer is "Australian megswill beers are not balanced".

Lastly, POR is fantastic for classic Ausralian-style bittering, but crap for anything else. Thats what it was developed for - a bittering hop with high alpha acids so that it may save the breweries a buck on buying hops.

This is a circular argument. The "Australian style" is crap because it uses poorly grown POR. To stop making crap beer you stop making the "Australian style". Get rid of the crap imputs and the result is the new"Australian Style"

and yes I was comparing alcohol levels to European lagers and Pilzners. In my mind I thing they are examples of what Australian beer could be. Anthing less than 5% is a mid-strength beer in my mind.

 

[beersom]

It is strong, in regards to Alcohol content - compared to the yanks we have very strong beer



That would not be indicated by the sales of the megswills - they are selling more then ever..........

Our megaswill is not stonger than US megaswill
VB = 4.9
Bubweiser= 5
Tooheys = 4.6
Coors = 5
millers = 4.6
XXXX = 4.8


As far as sales goes, domestic mainstream beer sales are almost flat (1-3%) domestic premium and import (crown, stella etc) are an impressive 15-17% growth. Craft beer growth reports vary (hard to get good figures) but seem to be in the order of 23% !!! Yikes!!!

 

[Hutch]

The "Australian style" is crap because it uses poorly grown POR. To stop making crap beer you stop making the "Australian style". Get rid of the crap imputs and the result is the new"Australian Style"

and yes I was comparing alcohol levels to European lagers and Pilzners. In my mind I thing they are examples of what Australian beer could be.

If they were to start brewing beers to a similar standard as to the Euro lagers/Pilsners etc. then it would cost as much (or more) to produce than the imported megaswill (better grain bill, imported hops, water treatement, cold fermentation, extended lagering, etc. etc.), and would consequently not sell. There would be no "premium imported" label, and therefore impossible to sell at the inflated price. Unfortunately we're stuck with the substandard quality they churn out in order to maximise turnover, and therefor profit.

Like you, I wish it could change overnight, but I don't think this is ever likely to happen.

 

[ibast]

You seem to think that the product we produce is the result of a lack of care, or quality of process, or quality of ingredients. Sorry mate, but if you personally put in 10% of the effort to ensuring those things in your beer, that we do in ours, you are a rare bird indeed. It takes a hell of a lot of effort and some pretty damn dedicated and talented brewers to make the "megaswill" that has been so maligned (by me too remember) in this thread.

Make no mistake - that beer is the way it is as a result of extreme attention to quality, of both ingredients and method. It tastes exactly the way it is intended to taste; and that taste is carefully designed to please the palates of the majority of beer drinkers in Australia.

If its not to your taste - fair enough, its not to mine either. But to think its because of bad brewing ... sorry, but I am personally insulted. You don't know what you are talking about.

And as for everybody assuming that people haven't got enough of a handle on their own preferences that they have somehow been "tricked" by marketing into liking these sorts of beers.... just how much smarter and better than 90% of the rest of the population do you think you are?? Seriously its just rampant arrogance and elitism. People drink what they do because thats what they prefer, not because they are too dumb to know better. Jeezus.

I like craft beer - I like Homebrew - I like a lot of great imported Beer - I dislike many domestic mega brews: Surely thats good enough?? why does there have to be a series of conspiracies and vile hidden motives behind it? Are people so frightened of being different that they need to spout rubbish in order to prove that while they are in the minority they are still nonetheless "right"

I don't think I've every personally attacked the brewers, suggested the processes used are not the best they can be or that the effort of the brewers are less than 100%.

I will withdraw the accusation about recipe fiddling from this thread as it has clearly produced an emotive responce. The comment was aimed at the companies not the brewers.

I do believe the ingredients used are being driven too much by economic reasons and the brewers are doing everything they can with them.

As for marketing the brew, the big two are very careful to cast in a negative light any non-Australian style beers.

The Carlton draught adds are very much about this. The "made from beer" slogan is very much saying any beer that emphasizes ingredients or quality is a wankers beer.

Same with the latest Hahn "man skating" adds. they are very much saying "real men drink Australian style beers".

If you must come up with fantasies that are insulting to the people who actually brew the beer you are talking about, at least try to get your facts right, it would make a pleasant change.

I haven't made any personal attacks in the thread but there have been a few aimed at me.

Once again the thread is "why is magaswill crap". Written above is based on what I taste when I taste megaswill.

Perhaps the brewers should be taking something from it rather than going on the attack.