Tasting Notes: Wessex Brewery: Russian Stoat

Wessex Brewery: Russian Stoat (England: Imperial Stout: 9% ABV)

Visual: Black, with a thin off white dusting for a head.

Nose: Dust and dark chocolate. Sour cherries.

Body: Liquorice. Treacle and rich chocolate liquore. Molasses. Charring. A moderate bitter behind. Thick texture. Very sweet. Black cherry, Some coffee trace but not a main element. Sour cream.

Finish: Bitter coffee and liquorice dust. Sour drops sweets. Red wine.

Conclusion: Ah the imperial stout. Oft the big gun of a brewery and I style that I have been utterly spoilt on due to the effort some breweries put into their efforts.  As of such I had to remind myself, this is a beer that you can get on tap in a local pub, turned out at the usual price for a pint. I should not expect it to live up to the insane efforts turned out at a tenner a bottle.

Thus when I took it as itself I found it a very sweet Imperial Stout, one that plays to molasses like levels at times. A good bitterness and charring at the back. There are a few little innovations in sour fruitiness in a black cherry style that platys from nose to finish. A bit of difference that makes all the, well, difference.

It’s full flavoured as it should be, more chocolate than coffee. The coffee is a side not for the most part. The slight sourness works well to keep the sweetness from becoming over much or ill tasting. There is also a slight sour cream, which is very much part of the traditional Russian Imperial Stout interpretation another element that helps keep it drinkable.

This doesn’t compete with the big guns but is a solid as heck Imperial Stout. For quality and style its closest competitor is probably Pitstops’ Sump. Sump however is the more refined and superior of the two beers.  This is still well made however, full of flavour and I can’t complain in having had a chance to try it. Not the best, but could very well be the best of the selection you are offered at a given time and thus well worth trying.

Background: Drunk at a mini beer festival at the Assembly Inn. This was had just before and during a Sunday roast, though the majority of the notes were complete before the food arrived.  This was the heaviest thing on the beer list so I allowed myself a half to round out the tasting note segment of the day.  Imperial Stouts are one of my favourite styles for contemplation, but one I try to have not too often lest they become taken for granted. They are distinctly not anytime beers.

Tasting Notes: Wessex Brewery: Warminster Warrior

Wessex Brewery: Warminster Warrior (England: Bitter: 4.5% ABV)

Visual: Chestnut brown and still. A thin whisper of a white head.

Nose: Lightly earthy and lightly sour. Very light.

Body: Light caramel. Slight sulphur. Mild bitterness. Malt drinks and some nuttiness. Smooth texture.

Finish: Chestnuts and light earthy hops. Bitterness rises slowly as does the earthy element. Slightly menthol at times.

Conclusion: this beer hides from you. The aroma is nigh on non existent, which left me wondering exactly what I was in for when I started drinking this.

Getting into the main body you find that it isn’t a heavy hitter there either. There’s light bitterness and chestnut in the style. It is solidly earthy at the edges as you would expect from British hops. It fits pretty solidly into your expectations of a nutty bitter, so not particularly showy.

The nuttiness is the main trait, never heavy but it’s the closest thing to a dominant element. It’s slightly dry and most of the best work comes in the finish. There the light earthiness grows well and brings fair solid bitter with it.  In fact the finish lasts quite a while as well, and is one of the better elements of the beer.

Not a particularly thirst quenching beer for a bitter. It doesn’t have that slight sourness that the best of the style have. All in all not a great beer, it does the job, but it never looks above average.

Background: Drunk at the Assembly Inn as part of their beer festival over the weekend. The notes at the festival indicated that they couldn’t find any tasting notes for this on Google. Therefore I decided to give it a go and help out anyone looking for them in the future.

Tasting Notes: Brewdog: Dog A

Brewdog: Dog A (Scotland: Imperial Stout: 15.1% ABV)

Visual: Black and leaving viscous trails. A rich coffee froth head comes easily and disappears just as quick. Thick while it lasts but soon becomes suds and islands.  A quick swirl brings it back to the fore though.

Nose: Heavy coffee beans in a roasted style. Hazelnuts. Ground pepper seeds and a touch of greenery. Bitter cocoa. Wood smoke. Barbecues and maybe even glazed steak at a moment. For some reason I think of hickory, but considering how rarely I encounter that aroma I would not like to call it.

Body: Heavy chocolate. Slow rise of a spicy tingle. Black forest gateaux. Honey. Heavily bitter and a very thick texture. Treacle. Black cherry. Bitter coffee and a roasted nut centre. Greenery. Light toffee and some liquorice hints.

Finish: Chocolate and cream. The chilli tingle hangs here. Slightly peppery at times. Chocolate orange touches when it feels sweeter maybe. Coffee. After a while becomes much more bitter chocolate. Slight hop character and sour cream twist at times.

Conclusion:  So we have what was effectively AB04, one of Brewdogs most highly rated beers, but with all its special elements ratcheted up.  The question is, does more make better? Let’s find out.

Oddly considering the added vanilla it seems to be the bitterness that has really ramped up here. Considering I have previous gone on record to state that I would like to see a few new high abv beers from Brewdog that don’t go the highly sweet route, this did come as a pleasant and well timed surprise.  While not highly hopped or insane on craft beer levels, compared to AB04 this is tongue etchingly bitter.

The coffee and chocolate are distinctly unsweetened and raw, with roasted touches to the middle. The finish is almost sour cream touched and holds a mild but noticeable chilli looming air.  Like the Stone Brewing Imperial Stout it does reveal more over time and with larger samplings.  Here it adds toffee sweetness, but also more of a chilli presence, for a sweeter but warming experience. Even here the cocoa dustings as it exits remain stoically bitter.  The flavour is heavy, sacrificing some of the subtlety of AB04 for a massive rise in raw punch and flavour.

Despite the added bitterness it does keep a firm richness of character and the texture froths up nicely.  It has a depth to the chocolate character that benefits from rolling around the mouth to examine, adding chocolate liquore like lacings to the beer and occasional black cherry touches.

Now after saying all that I’m torn a bit. It is very good. The only element against it is a liquorice like element that made me convinced they had used liquorice sticks in brewing (to the best of my knowledge they haven’t). This bit doesn’t always sit well with the rest of the beer. That however is a minor touch, and is balanced against many improvements, such as the chilli which is used much better here than in AB04. More noticeable but far from intrusive. Balanced against all these complements about its depth of chocolate flavour, its careful coffee touches in the bitterness, the amazingly restrained alcohol for the abv, against all this I must say. It is bloody expensive.

It has a premium price tag, Not Dark Lord or 40 year Bowmore Paradox silly level, but still heavy. Id say, despite my reservations, that it may just be worth it. It doesn’t beat out my all time top Imperial Stouts, but it is distinct enough to be worth it on its own merits and is a close contender.

What really makes it is while it doesn’t have the same range of flavour, it is much more texturally nuanced than those beers, it gives extra depths to the flavours it does has that draw you in.

A multi textured treat, viscous stout texture one moment, liquore like another, roasted at the next, all giving new takes on what you have drunk before. It takes time to show its full glory but is worth it when it does.

Expensive, but expressive.

Background: This one has been the source of some controversy.  This beer was brewed to celebrate their fifth anniversary, and was initially indicated to be a rebrew of AB04 – possibly their most sought after beer. This caused a kafuffle as Abstrakts were initially pitched as one off brews and some people viewed this as a broken promise. Personally I wasn’t too bothered, part of the joy of beer is sharing. However when it was released there was another group of dissenting rumblings, as the cost was significantly higher than AB04.  Brewdog clarified that while this used the same base beer as AB04 it had vanilla added, three times as much chilli and used different coffee. The primary cost booster however seemed to be that it spent significantly longer in the tank ageing – 5 months in fact.  Thus after much commotion the beer arrived to me, ready to be examined and enjoyed and to see if it is worth the hefty price tag. I was quite looking forwards to this. AB04 has gone up in my opinion since the original review, with a year aged version and keg version sampled since, both of which added greatly to the flavour and experience. Oh yeah, before I get, the usual disclaimer, I am not an unbiased actor on Brewdog beers – though some times I feel I may be overly critical on their brews to compensate for this. Please use your own judgement when reading.

Tasting Notes:Bear Republic: Hop Rod Rye

Bear Republic: Hop Rod Rye (USA: IIPA:8% ABV)

Visual: A dark clear reddish brown. Bubbly brown mounds for a head.

Nose: Sweet and rye filled. Grapefruit. Vanilla toffee that becomes caramel as it warms.  Malt drinks with a light chocolate touch.

Body: Rye crackers. Bitter. Pineapple freshness. Vanilla. Pulped kiwi. Toffee. Drying even as you drink it. Nettle hop feel. Peach and apricot juice. Strawberry jam occasionally.

Finish: Solidly bitter. Hoppy and also very dry rye crackers. Kiwi again. Almost salty dryness. Apricot.

Conclusion:  This is one I have been keeping an eye out for since it was recommended to me. Rye based drinks intrigue me anyway. They always seem to bring so much to the aroma. Usually massive sweetness, with toffee, vanilla and caramel all in play. The style is utterly distinctive.  However so far in my experience, the drinks themselves never seem to live up to the bold promises of the aroma.

So far anyway. That is about to change.

With a base beer not unlike the Racer 5 IPA you get a huge amount of fruitiness going on before you even introduce the rye which brings its usual sweetness and a surprising dryness.  The face that you get rye cracker like flavour is hardly shocking, the fact that it feels salted on the other hand is. Even main body you feel it, but on the finish the tongue drying effect is remarkable.  This makes each future sip all the more welcome, even if it is still crisply dry.

There Is a great range of flavour brought with it. The rye and IPA elements have full impact without treading on each others toes.  The only problem I have is trying to decide when is the best time to have a drink such as this.  The competing sweet and fruit elements demand attention, but the dryness encourages quicker drinking early on, then discourages at the end as it becomes heavier. The abv however definitely discourage against the quick consumption. It is a delicious contradiction and the beer definitely deserves your attention. It is not an every day beer, about half way through drinking you get a tickling feeling at the back of the throat to remind you exactly what you are drinking.

A delicious beer to examine exactly what can be gained from merging the distinct styles. A beer of experimentation and contemplation on the beer styles themselves and the flavours they entail. Oh and a fine beer.

Background: Recommended by the booze dancers in response to my enjoyment of “Racer 5”. I had found this before in London at “The Rake” but didn’t get the chance to review it then.  Since I had enjoyed it I took full advantage of finding it at Beers of Europe and ordered myself some for enjoyment and review. This is made with 20% rye malt, and apart from that I would guess it is pretty close to racer 5 in build.

Tasting Notes: Mikkeller: Beer Geek Brunch Weasel: Cognac Barrel

Mikkeller: Beer Geek Brunch Weasel: Cognac Barrel (Denmark: Imperial Stout: 10.9% ABV)

Visual: Jet black, pours thick and slick with a deep chocolate coloured rich head.

Nose: Honey. Oatmeal. Chocolate. Spiced blueberry. Thick treacle. Crystallised orange sweetness. Crumbly chocolate cake. Raisins.

Body: Viscous. Bitter chocolate. Bitter coffee. Very smooth oats. Froths nicely to sweeter chocolate. Marmalade undertones. Raisins and plums.

Finish: Very bitter chocolate. Bitter coffee. Porridge oats. Very potent indeed in the coffee flavour here. Almonds reside here as well and hazelnuts. Light marmalade grows over time.

Conclusion: You know, I have often called for the more potent beers to be available in smaller bottles. The trend towards 660ml/750ml bottles of 10-15% abv beers has been great for sharing, but they just don’t suit all occasions.

This beer comes in a 25cl bottle. Come on! There is a whole excluded middle thing going on here!

The beer, however small its package, is as delicious as ever. The usual Beer Geek Brunch Weasel (BGBW from now on) traits of wonderfully deep chocolate and coffee flavours are on full show. The thick oatmeal texture and dark fruit rising over time are present as well. In fact even more so than Black Hole this is a beer where the cognac influence struggles to make itself felt.

There are some influences though, subtle but present. The aroma especially picks up some spirit touches, and a very light marmalade sweetness as well. In fact there is marmalade touches nigh hidden, but present, throughout. Id say some part of its influence seems to give the dark fruit more play as well.

However it is effectively the BGBW flavours that stand tall. No bad thing, it is a fantastic beer. Everything good I said about that beer still holds true here. The depths it brings to the simple words “chocolate” and “coffee” the range, the thickness, the texture. All here. The bitterness of both coffee and chocolate are resplendent and tongue coating. For all the slick texture the oatmeal seems to give it grip that makes the bitterness last.

However the cognac adds but little, and for all I like to see smaller bottles you can get 660ml of BGBW for 250ml of this. Id say go with standard BGBW. However if you see this and not standard, well it’s still the same beer pretty much, and definitely the same quality, Drink it. It is delicious and still after all this time one of the greatest Imperial Stouts of all time.

That’s a hell of a good beer.

Background: Beer Geek Brunch Weasel was, and still is, one of my favourite Imperial Stouts and in fact beers, ever. It comes in a close second after Good King Henry: Special Reserve (Don’t ask me to pick a third, the Imperial Stout competition is too tight and I just can’t do it). Thus a cognac aged version sounded like just the thing. For those of you looking at the tags and noticing this doesn’t have a “My favourites” entry, it is just because I have already had Beer Geek Brunch Weasel, which has taken the place. This beer is just as good, but not distinct enough to earn a separate place.  Anyway, yes an oatmeal imperial stout made with partially digested coffee beans. I.E. weasel shit.

Tasting Notes: Moor: Northern Star

Moor: Northern Star (England: Golden Ale: 4.3% abv)

Visual: Hazy lemon, with a large bubbly white head that contains mounds and troughs within it.  The main body has a few small bubbles within it but not much.

Nose: Really fresh, jiff lemon. Very crisp. Ice cream. Touch of pineapple. Very slight bitterness. Elderberry.

Body: Solidly bitter. Lemon meringue. Quite sherbet like. Pineapple. Slight fruit syrups. Slight bitter ale like sourness. Dried apricot

Finish: Gooseberry and hops. Pineapple. Quite dry bitterness. Honey. Dried apricot and mango.

Conclusion: What a deceitful little aroma. Ok it does prepare you for the lemon and the slight citrus tartness, I’ll give it that. What didn’t it do? Hint at any real bitterness.

Thus while the beer is not insanely bitter, the kick I got on first sipping it hit far harder that you would expect. It’s all in the timing I guess. It’s the surprise really. I was slightly better prepared on the finish where you get big lasting bitterness coming once again.

Despite the fresh citrus nature the play of the bitterness is far closer to that of the Bitter style than it is to the lighter Golden Ale which the flavour plays to. Notably it also has that slight sourness that a lot of bitters have that make them so refreshing.

Combine the two and you get a golden ale of impressively thirst quenching nature and solid bitterness. There are some minor downsides to this that the beer is tailored more towards thirst quenching than a large range of flavour, but I can’t fault it too much for that.

A side note if I may. Most beer pouring advice indicate to not disturb the yeast within. Here I would advise the exact opposite. Not only does a swirl to add the yeast add additional dried fruit flavours, it also makes the beer cloudy in a way that gives the impression of a tropical fruit drink. Which amused me somewhat.

In fact the yeast added version had much more sweetness to go with the impressive bitterness. Combined I find the extra flavour is well worth it.

An absolute thirst quencher balanced nicely between bitter and golden ale. A few bottles of these between friends would make a good standby of a summer drinking session, be it barbecue or chat. It does what it set out to do and it does it very well.

Background: While I have been muted on response to a few Moor beers here over the years, I have grown quite fond of them. Generally finding that the cask versions take the beers I enjoyed, but found not exceptional, and really ratcheted all the good qualities up.  As of such, I have taken to revisiting their bottle range to see what else may lie within. Bought from Beers of Europe, this is apparently the same beer as Nor’Hop. I say apparently as a quick Google search indicates the abv is different (4.1% vs 4.3%), but I guess generally the same beer. Also, despite the jokes of my friends, I did not mistakenly buy this thinking it was brewed in the North.  The bottle does warn you of the beers impressive bitterness, and if I had read it before drinking the beer I would have been less shocked. However I try to avoid reading such notes until after I drink lest they influence my review.

Tasting Notes: Weyerbacher: Double Simcoe IPA

Weyerbacher: Double Simcoe IPA (USA: IIPA: 9% ABV)

Visual: Dark browned amber and quite hazy. Large frothy head of solid tight bubbles. A medium amount of small bubbled carbonation.

Nose: Malt and digestive biscuits. Toffee. Apricot. Vanilla. Heavier mango notes as it warms.

Body: Solidly bitter, Liquorice sticks. Caramel. Honey. Lots of malt. Dried apricot. Passion fruit in the depths. Slightly green.

Finish: Bitter hops. Liquorice sticks again. Honey.  Pineapple. Cucumber. Hop oil.

Conclusion: What we have here is a brutally sweet and brutally bitter Imperial IPA. The sweetness cannot be contained with caramel and honey mixed with dried apricot all working against the massive bitter kick.  It then adds interesting twists top and tail with a very biscuit heavy aroma and strange cucumber like green vibe to the finish.

It feels indulgent to drink, smooth to slip down but you soon realise it has left clinging hop trails on the way down that build up to impressive levels on your tongue.

If there are complaints to bring to bare it would be that the massive malt sweetness sometimes doesn’t quite give the simcoe hop room to roam – it can dominate the conversation somewhat. The hop does always find its way back out again though, bringing out fruity yet green touched flavour. That along with the thick texture bringing hop oil touches to the finish give a distinct fingerprint of the hop character on this beer when it rides back out once more.  The malt may dominate at times, but the hop is what gives it character.

An excellent beer, one of a few minor quirks, but heavy set on flavour and a delicious bitter sweet balance.

Background: Simcoe. A hop with a copyright marker. I was going to make sarcastic remarks about copyrighting nature, but apparently this was a very carefully bred hop to get high alpha acids without increasing (double checks “1001 beers you must try before you die”) cohumulone levels which apparently not good for a beer. It has a harsher bitterness or something like that. Anyway, what I know is Simcoe fricking rules, it is up there with Nelson Sauvin, Sorachi Ace and the like on hops I keep an eye out for. Therefore I bought this beer. That is all.

Tasting Notes: Kiuchi: Hitachino Nest: Weizen: Hitachino Nest: Weizen

Kiuchi: Hitachino Nest: Weizen (Japan: Hefeweizen: 5.5% ABV)

Visual: Slightly hazy. The colour is halfway between orange and mature banana skin. Surprisingly small bubbly white head. Looks somewhat fruit juice like in main body.

Nose: Wheat. Tangerine. Overripe banana. Ice cream syrup toppings. Cinnamon. Quite fresh and slightly acidic.

Body: Cloves. Fresh tangerine. Sherbet lemon. Banana. Moderate bitterness at the back. Tart apple juice.

Finish: Grapefruit juice. What and bitterness.

Conclusion: I didn’t realise it was possible to pour a weizen and not get a massive head.  Erm, maybe I should rephrase that, but I think you get the point. Most weisse beer end up being poured as if they were nitro glycerine just to make sure they don’t froth up.

This thing splashed into the glass from a great height , happily spilling around the glass with but a small set of bubbles forming over a fruit juice looking beer. Huh. Time to recheck the expectations I feel.

The aroma and body play in the right field. Wheat, fresh banana, but is tart and more acidic than I would usually expect. It is recognisably a weizen in ways,  such at the wheat in front and back, but has an unusual fresh tangerine acidity that is new.  The beer comes in a bit too fizzy which hides some of the flavour, but that is a common weizen flaw, and it taste well enough nonetheless.

Not to make too much of the beer, because it does have flaws, but I do find it immensely cheerful and a fun twist on the style. While still seeming familiar enough to make a relaxing summer days weizen, it does have good quirks.  It is much more fruit juice influenced, a tart grapefruit like finish and apple juice like element to main body are the most noticeable and they really help keep it fresh. In some ways it seems to pick up a few cues from the American Pale Ale style as well.

Now I wouldn’t recommend making a big deal out of hunting this down, it isn’t that amazing, but I would be lying if I said Id pass up the chance to try it again. It’s fun, fresh and has just enough weisse style. It’s not up there with the German takes on the style, but frankly, what is?

Background: Picked up from Brewdogs Guest Beer section (yes I have been saying that lot, don’t worry I just got my batch of beers from beers of Europe, so that’s the next phrase you will get sick of hearing). I really enjoy picking up beers from the growing Japanese craft beer scene, in part because of how few people seem to appreciate the quality beers being made there- and that includes the locals. I went for a hefeweizen as it was the beer style that first caught my attention for something different and wondered what spin the brewery would put on it. Incidentally I love the dinky little bottles, and just wish I had one of those small half pint versions of the Erdinger glass to use for the beer as they always look fun.

 

Tasting Notes: Alesmith: Grand Cru

Alesmith: Grand Cru (USA: Belgium Strong Ale: 10% ABV)

Visual:Dark bronzed red. Massive off white head made of a mix of small bubbles.

Nose: Wheat. Slightly vinous sour grapes. Malt drink. Raisins.

Body: Red grapes. Malt loaf and sultanas. Dry malt drinks. Very vinous. Slight sour white grapes. Light aniseed. Malt chocolate.

Finish: Bitter. Wheat. Dry. White wine and sour grapes. Cinnamon. Soy sauce. Liquorice.

Conclusion: Bit of a disappointment this one. Maybe I built it up too much in my mind as I was looking forwards to it. Not a bad beer, but compared to similar beers with similar reputations it just doesn’t quite match up.

I’ve pretty much started at the end there. Maybe being a bit harsh as well. Lets go back to the start and I shall explain.

The aroma was fairly simple, it calls to the Belgium Saison style with dryness and what characteristics. What it didn’t do was get me excited for the main beer. It did have a slight sourness but not too much is hinted at. Thus I had to move onto the main body for it to stand on it’s own merits alone.

The body definitely showed the influence of Belgium yeast (or if not then a facsimile thereof) in the texture, but the flavours call more to heavily smoothed out version of the British ESB style. Now here it does do some nice tricks with fruit flavour, wine sourness and a dryness mixed in. It did seem a bit light without any push or emphasis initially. This resolves itself as I poured more into the glass. Either the flavour had built up or, at a guess, the extra dislodging of the yeast in the bottle helped the flavour. Its amazing how many times with beers like these the second glass from the bottle is far more flavoursome than the first.

The finish is dry and simple. Maybe it was due to only having a year to age but the beer seemed to fare badly against the three year aged Bush Prestige I had before. They seem to play for the same style butt this beer doesn’t have the same range or craft.

Now I have listed the areas I found disappointing I will say again it isn’t a bad beer, just not in the league it was seemingly aiming for. It is nicely vinous and tart, easy to drink and does have decent flavour to the main body. The mix of styles is interesting, and gives the impression of a malt drink saision with vinous touches. Not as good as that sounds though. It does do a nice mix of raisins and red wine with lots of Belgium character. I guess for all its reputation, and my enjoyment of the similar, Bush Prestige I was just expecting more. Not bad, just not great.

Background: Picked up a while back from Brewdogs guest beer section. There’s no bottled on date, but based on how long it’s been in my cupboard and how long American beers usually take to get here I would guess it’s had about a years ageing. Alesmith is one of these breweries that have a legendary rep, but I’ve yet to try a beer from them that matches their rep. There haven’t been any bad beers, just none so great as to make me go wow. Then again it took me a while to find beers that made me see why Moor had a good rep as well and now I love that brewery, so I’m always willing to give Alesmith another try to see what I’m missing. (odd fact noticed from this write up, I always seem to typo “malt loaf” as “malt load” – I really hope I didn’t miss this elsewhere). Final Note: I have been reading “John Dies At The End” which may explain the sudden appearance of the “Soy Sauce” flavour note in this review.

Tasting Notes: Mikkeller: Black Hole: Cognac Barrel

Mikkeller: Black Hole: Cognac Barrel (Denmark: Imperial Stout:13.1% ABV)

Visual: Black. Thick creamy coffee coloured head with burnt toffee coloured bubbles at the base.

Nose: Smooth creamy chocolate. Milky coffee. Slight plums. Thick marmalade. A slight spirit edge.

Body: Bitter chocolate. Raisins. Figs. Quiet creamy. Cinnamon. Marmalade again. Caramel. Plums.

Finish:  Bitter chocolate gratings, or maybe chocolate cake. Cream. Milky coffee. A light hop touch.

Conclusion: One day I will get bored of barrel aged black hole variants. One day. Today is not that day however.  This one, cognac aged, initially seems remarkable unaltered by its time in the wood. I thought to myself “Maybe the cognac had found its match and could not escape the black hole of flavour”.

A bit more time proved that hypothesis incorrect. The beer is smoother, and does have a spirit touch to it. Though frankly standard black hole had enough of a punch with it’s abv that you can understand how that is easily missed.

A bit more time and the real differences started to show themselves. Marmalade and distinct dark fruit nestled dangerously at the beers heart.  While not transforming the Black Hole it does complement it well. The strength of the base beer guards it against the common criticism of barrel aged beers, that of losing the base beer to becoming a clone of whatever it was aged in. You can tell that the base beers bitter chocolate and coffee are still present in full force.

The fruit does give it a touch of Trappist Quadrupel in its impressions, and frankly I can think of very few situations where those words are not a compliment. I would say that while delicious that maybe the influence is still a tad too restrained. The Red Wine version walked the thin balance between influencing and overwhelming better.  This should not however be taken as a slight, like all Black Holes this is delicious, rich and powerful yet smooth. It is just not the best in the extraordinary class that is the barrel aged range. Frankly that is faint criticism indeed. A fine beer.

Background: Yet another barrel aged Black Hole. Black Hole was one of the first insanely big stouts, or possibly even the first if my memory holds true.  As of such I love trying the different variants. Cognac ageing intrigues me, though I have only really seen it in Fullers Brewers Reserve so far.  Mikkeller are a great bunch of brewers who use other peoples breweries to make their beer. A fine and fun set of brews is the result.