Chocolate and Beer; Must We Really Keep Trying?

Hotel Chocolate Pale Cocoa Beer - the colour isn't what you'd expect

Someone keeps deciding to try mixing chocolate with alcohol. And so, here am I, every now and then, writing about it. I don’t mind when it’s harmonious marriages like Thornton’s Chocolate Liqueur or The Secret chocolate wine, but there are other things where I just don’t see the point, and can only assume it’s part of some attempt to part a fool and my money, because, as I'm sure I've said before, beer and chocolate don't really go together - unless both are Belgian. And this obsession with constantly trying to put them together is akin to they way people keep putting chilli and chocolate together, and it just isn't necessary. In my opinion.

This week’s initial focus is Hotel Chocolat’s Pale Cocoa Beer. It’s 4.9% and brewed by Brewshed Brewery in Bury St Edmunds. I was given this as part of a birthday present, all of the items of which were from Hotel Chocolat. You’ll be able to read about some of the other items elsewhere on the blog.

Anyway, this particular product is obviously aimed at providing a gift to someone who likes beer. I can’t imagine a beer drinker actually buying this for themselves. Can you? I would actually be prepared to bet that at least 9 out of 10 people who have logged this beer on Untappd, received this as a gift.

I don’t have a problem with that. Were you getting the idea that I did? At the very least, it’s a distinct beer to add to my log, and to a geek like me, something fairly exciting to receive. So what am I whittering on about? Is it no good?

Well, let me tell you; on the absolute contrary, it’s very good indeed. I really enjoyed it, and scored it a much better than average 4 out of 5. Right? Ok, so here’s the thing; it doesn’t taste of chocolate. So… was the chocolate necessary? Does it make it better than say, if the same beer was made without chocolate?

I haven’t logged any other beers from the Brewshed Brewery, but a quick look at Untappd suggests their output is interesting. One in particular I’d like to get my hands on is the Rioja Porter, which is matured in old Lan rioja oak casks.

As for the Pale Cocoa beer; it is brewed with cocoa pulp, so presumably that does have some influence. It could be a while before I’m able to determine the effects one way or the other. This is a nice beer though.

While we’re on it, we may as well have a shuft at a couple more.

Cocoa Hops

Cocoa Hops is a 4.4% porter from The Chocolate Café in Ramsbottom. A loose pun on the popular child’s breakfast cereal, it is brewed by the local Irwell Works Brewery – a fine example of local business collaboration. I scored it only 2.5 out of 5 as I felt it was a bit thin, and I could barely detect any chocolate influence. It was nice to try though.

Young’s Double Chocolate Stout

Double chocolate. Two words that in combination will make a lady’s seat moisten. That’s all very well for ice cream. And cookies. But what about beer? Well this is right up Mrs Cake’s street, and she absolutely loved it. I found it merely average, in spite of a generous 5.2% ABV, scoring it 3 out of 5.

Did it taste of chocolate? Well, probably, in a slightly bitter way.

Finally, I’ve had a quick look at Untappd and found three other chocolate beers that I’ve tried. These came up when I typed “chocolate” into the search field. Here’s how I scored them:

Chocolate Snap (4.9%) by Offbeat Brewery – 3.5/5

Old Tom Chocolate (6%) by Robinsons Brewery – 3/5

Triple Chocoholic (4.8%) by Saltaire Brewery – 3.5/5

Then, when I typed “cocoa”, the two beers that started this post came up, along with Thornbridge’s Cocoa Wonderland (6.8%), which I scored 4/5.

That leaves Thornbridge and Hotel Chocolat topping the chocolate beer league table, so well done to them. And that’s going to have to do for now, I’m afraid. Usually if I see a chocolate beer, I buy it for Mrs Cake, cos she absolutely loves that shit. She lets me have a taste, but given how little I manage to write about a full glass, can you imagine how little I’d have to say about a sip? Yeh, not very much. I will try to glean further impressions as time goes on, with a view to a follow up post at some time in the future, but in the meantime there are all kinds of other things to be getting on with drinking. So join me next week, when I’ll be telling you about some more of that.

And for now; must we really keep trying to combine chocolate and beer? Ok; if you must.

A Little Look at Some Miniatures

For some reason I’ve started coming into possession of miniatures. It’s quite nice really. It means people can give me alcohol without having to spend too much money. There’s far too little in those bottles for me to give each product its own post, but it doesn’t mean I can’t group them together. So I thought I’d look at miniatures this week.

Grant’s The Family Reserve (40%)

One of four old miniatures that were delivered to my work one day. When I say “old”, I mean the branding suggests these were bottled in the 90s and had been sitting in someone’s booze cupboard ever since… until the day the owner passed on and their son decided to put them in a jiffy bag and send them to me. Many thanks. I would be interested to find out how the contents might be different from the current incarnation, but I didn’t have the resources or inclination to buy a bottle for this.

I actually decided to try this one alongside Aldi’s Highland Black8, as I was conducting a blend test at the time. For the record, I have decided to include the results of this particular matching here and not in the earlier post because I’d already written the bulk of that one, and didn’t want to have to deconstruct and reconfigure it just for the sake of 5cl of cheap blended scotch.

My notes state that the Grant’s is lacking immediate sweetness, and is quite savoury. I concluded that the product must have improved since then, as I consider Grant’s Family Reserve to be half decent, low cost, entry level blended scotch. In comparison with the Highland Black, this miniature didn’t match up.

 

Macallan Gold (40%)

I’ve never bought a Macallan (except in a restaurant once), as it always strikes me as being more expensive than it should be – not that I based that conclusion on evidence of quality, more on comparable categories. A no age statement, entry level expression for example, shouldn’t be £37 to £42, while a 12 year old sherry cask finish shouldn’t be £60+ - unless it’s cask strength.

Perhaps I’ll change my mind if I do ever buy a bottle, but for now, this miniature is going to have to form my lasting impression. And in all fairness, it was a good impression.

Mortlach 15 (Gordon & MacPhail) (43%)

Impressing me more than the Macallan Gold however, was a miniature Mortlach 15, bottled by Gordon and MacPhail. A standard size bottle of this might be even more expensive, but I’d be more inclined to find out at this point.

Ardbeg 10 (46%)

I’m already a massive fan of this one, so it was lovely to receive it from a colleague who is from the magical island of Islay. I used it to help in my evaluation of Old Ballantruan, though I won’t ruin that upcoming post by revealing anything here – other than that Ardbeg remains a true gent among peaty malts – in fact, among any malts.

Bushmills 10 (40%)

The first of the remaining three miniatures from the 90s. I’ve tried the standard Bushmills Original before, finding it average but acceptable, so single malt offering was intriguing, and I’m pleased to say it’s good. It has an inviting nose, and while it’s light-bodied, making it reminiscent of its blended cousin, there’s a lot to recommend it.

Glenfiddich Special Reserve (40%)

This one came in a little cardboard tube, which was a nice touch. I hadn’t seen this before, but a little internet research revealed that this expression preceded the 12 year old that we’re all so familiar with today. I drank it alongside a glass of today’s standard 12 year old, and my conclusion was that the Special Reserve was marginally better. It was lighter in colour and smelled younger and less rounded, while the 12 year old exhibited more sherry notes on the nose. In terms of flavour though, the Special Reserve tastes better than it smells – sweet and syrupy. The 12 year old brought to mind rubber and pears.

St Michael Lowland (40%)

St Michael – you don’t see that anymore, do you? Do you remember? Yes, this used to be Marks and Spencer’s own brand – we used to get their crisps. And this is their version of a lowland single malt. Very interesting, and in fact, very enjoyable. I found it light, fresh and playful, though perhaps with an unfortunate finish.

Smirnoff (37.5%)

Everyone knows the Smirnoff. This one came as a free gift with a bottle of Crown Royal I received at Christmas. I saved it for sipping in the car during our lift to the airport and, as such, it was very enjoyable.

Hotel Chocolat Salted Caramel Cocoa Vodka (26.5%)

What is it with salted caramel? It is so hot right now. This bottle formed part of a package that my sister sent over for my birthday. It was a nice idea to add one or two miniatures (and a beer) to the order, and one that gives me a chance to try something I wouldn’t normally bother going near.

Best served chilled over ice, says the website, so I popped this in the fridge for my Tuesday evening drinking session. I have to admit, I don’t like the smell. There’s just something dirty about it. The flavours are good though. It’s still not something I’ll be inclined to return to, but if you are a fan of salted caramel, I don’t think you could go wrong with this. Mrs Cake had a sip, and was suitably impressed.

I finished the evening with a slice of cake and a glass of Wild Turkey Kentucky Spirit, which I’m afraid was a mistake. The sweetness of the vodka and cake hijacked the bourbon, dispersing its normally beautiful construction and making me consider tipping it back in the bottle for later. There was also an odd meaty smell hanging around, which I put down to the vodka… but equally, I suppose it could have been my clothes.

Hotel Chocolat Special Reserve Tawny Port (20%)

Another component of my birthday package, I looked this one up on the Hotel Chocolat site, and found that it is recommended to be taken with milk chocolate. I’ve often had a problem mixing chocolate and various other sweet things with alcohol, so this seemed a surefire way to get what all the fuss is about – an alcoholic beverage, sold by a chocolate producer for the express purpose of consuming with chocolate.

What can I say? It’s fine, like, but I’d be lying if I didn’t tell you that I enjoyed the port more when I drank it on its own. This whole combination thing just strikes me as another attempt to get consumers to engage with products. I like chocolate, I don’t normally like port – in fact, I think this is the first time I’ve ever mentioned it on this blog – but I did like this one, and it doesn’t need to be combined with the chocolate in order to impress. It is actually a little lighter in the body than other ports I’ve tried and, while I’ve been very impressed with the Hotel Chocolat chocolate I’ve had in the past, I felt this one, which was half white, half milk with like, a reindeer on it or something, was a little bland. Perhaps it is the fillings which normally make this chocolate so enjoyable.

So in conclusion, I didn’t feel these items complemented each other in the way they were supposed to. The port though: very nice.

Grey Goose Vodka Cherry Noir (40%)

You have to wonder how much of the money you’re spending on a bottle of Grey Goose is paying for the packaging, because the bottles are always impressive – frosted glass with a clear centre that serves to distort and enhance a colourful image that has been placed on the back of the bottle. I ask because Grey Goose is one of the well known premium brands here in the UK – you’re generally looking at £35 for the standard, unflavoured variety – and I can’t see anything special about its flavour.

Mrs Cake got this miniature when she purchased a bottle of the standard in Canada, probably around 2 years ago. Finally I got to snaffle it. I thought it was nice and sweet at first, but that impression quickly changed to one of childhood medicine. Sure, that might be nice enough to persuade a sick child to drink it, but it’s not something I want reflected in my spirits. I also got a bit of a bready taste somewhere in there, that served to ultimately make this a fairly unpleasant experience. Sure, it’s probably intended for use in cocktails, but if that is the case, that just makes it worse – you shouldn’t be paying £30 plus for something to make a slight difference to your cocktails.

Now, I see Grey Goose also produce a “VX” expression, which includes a “hint of precious cognac”. Sounds interesting, but inevitably over-priced to me… I’ll just have a look… yes, £90 for a litre. Fuck off.

Conclusion

That’s my recent batch of miniatures finished. I’ll start a new post as time goes on, and return to this theme some time in the future. Thanks for having a little read, and see you next week.