LeCoq Imperial Extra Double Stout - Aging In My Cellar
By jason on Nov 21, 2007 in Aging Badly, Porters and Stouts, Reviews
Name: Imperial Extra Double Stout
Brewer: LeCoq
Style: Russian Imperial Stout
Vintage: 2003
Cellared On: October 30th, 2007
Original Tasting: November 20th, 2007
LeCoq is a somewhat polarizing beer in cellaring circles. A recent thread in the beer cellaring and aging forum on beeradvocate.com shows exactly why. Some people praise this beer for it’s uniquely slightly sour taste, while others point it it’s tendency to oxidize and spoil. I’ve been anxious to see what side of the fence I would end up on.
Unfortunately, as soon as I popped the cork on this brew, I had a pretty good idea of where I was going to stand. I could smell a musty odor coming from the bottle even before I poured a drop. It was definitely not a good sign. The mustiness only intensified as I poured, and the odor began to slide towards more of a moldy smell. I was distinctly reminded of old sweaty socks that haven’t been washed in awhile.
On the good side of things, I could also smell some sweet roasted malts behind the must, so maybe there was some good still left in this beer. It also looked very nice, dark black with the slightest tint of brown. There was a dark brown (but thin) head, and noticeable carbonation in bubbling up in the glass.
I started to bring the glass up to my lips. My arm was literally trembling - I just couldn’t get away from the smell. I took a deep breath, and reluctantly took a sip.
It was worse then I thought it would be. And that’s saying a lot.
Soured. Spoiled. Metallic. Bad, bad, bad. I could have probably given you a better description of the taste if I could’ve stomached a second sip, but there’s no way in hell that was happening. The rest of it went down the drain in a flash.
In retrospect, I’m wondering where this beer has been for the past four years. Was it kept badly? I have four more of these in the cellar, are they all going to taste like this?
As soon as I can work up the courage, I’m going to visit the rest of my bottles and see if I can find a good one anywhere in the bunch of them. I need some time to recover first, though.
Cellar Outlook: Grim.
Next Tasting: Whenever I feel the need to punish myself again.
Jason
If you enjoyed this article, you really should subscribe to my RSS feed or my Email Feed. Thanks again for visiting!
Is it possible that the beer was just a bad bottle? Some stouts are supposed to be sour too. Guinness adds a bit of sour beer to give it that “twang”.
DJ | Nov 23, 2007 | Reply
Hi DJ, thanks for stopping by.
I’m sure it was a bad bottle. Thing is, it seems that a lot of other people run into bad bottles too. I’m just hoping one of the four others I have haven’t soured like this one has so I can post some accurate tasting notes.
Jason | Nov 23, 2007 | Reply
I had a five year old bottle of this at The Royal Oak in Borough, London. I rather liked it. I do remember it had zero carbonation. There was definitely a sour twang.
This beer is not actually produced by a brewery call Le Coq - none exists in this day and age. Instead it’s a product of Harvey’s of Lewes, a traditional family brewer down in Sussex.
DJ - I’m pretty sure Guinness no longer add aged beer to young, although many decades ago that was the practice for it and indeed many other stouts. In the more distant past the mixing was done in the pub by the landlord from different barrels sometimes, and that’s the actual origin of the ludicrous “two stage pour” Guinness instruct bars to do with their nitrokeg stout these days. It makes no difference to the finished product, being as it is a bland and lifeless beer.
Stonch | Nov 28, 2007 | Reply
Hi Jason,
I orderened one of these in 2006 (under the Harvey’s name) from BeersOfEurope.com for my “300 beers” project. It tasted horrible and as I thought it had gone bad I ordered another bottle. The second bottle tasted exactly the same, but I finished it nonetheless… I am still not sure whether it is supposed to taste like that or whether both the bottles I tasted had been spoiled :-).
Az
AzBeer | Nov 30, 2007 | Reply
I’ve had about 20 bottles of this beer and every one has been different. There wasn’t a single one that I would consider “bad”. A couple were in the top ten beers I’ve drunk.
It’s the closest to a 19th century Imperial Stout being brewed anywhere today. And yes, it is supposed to be sour. A brettanomyces character is an essential component of a true Imperial Stout.
Ron Pattinson | Nov 30, 2007 | Reply
Hi Ron, thanks for coming by.
Were the bottles you had aged? The ones I purchased were off-the-shelf 2003 vintage. What I tasted was a bit more then sour or brett character, it really seemed like some kind of a Lactic acid bacteria infection. I think I need to get some of this while it’s fresh and just age it myself.
I also think I’m going to get myself a microscope and see if I can identify what’s happening in here.
jason | Nov 30, 2007 | Reply
Stonch - thanks for the info on this beer, I think I’ll change the name of the brewer on my post.
I also never knew the orgings of the two-stage pour, very cool!
jason | Nov 30, 2007 | Reply
The bottles were bought over the last 12 months but were all the 2003 vintage. Yes, there was sourness, but not of the bad kind. The amount varied between different bottles.
Ron Pattinson | Dec 3, 2007 | Reply