Page 3 - Rochefort 10 Complete
P. 3

The head had disappeared. Little ‘fizz’. Less ‘winey’ than the previous one, but more oily in appearance. Swirling
             released a richer, fruitier aroma. Sweeter tasting than the last one, and not as dry in mouth. More mouthfeel
             generally with a tiny bit of prickly liveliness. Generally not as satisfying as the 2004. Yeast improved the beer for
             the better in terms of flavour, but not by much.

             3.  23/05/2006


             Little  to  no  head  remained.  Little  ‘fizz’  again.  First  taste,  one  of  us  had  ‘died  and  gone  to  heaven’.  Delicious
             ‘ripples  of  flavour’.  Clean  sweetness.  Again  not  as  bitter  or  as  drying  in  the  mouth.  Generally  smoother  in
             mouthfeel, with enhanced, balanced flavours. The yeast added bitterness, and the flavour of cloves, which wasn’t
             evident in the initial poured beer. The degree of bitterness detracted from the smooth fruit flavours, and it was
             agreed that this version of the beer was better without the yeast.

             4.  04/09/2007


             A more lively beer, producing a head in the bottle on opening. In the glass the head faded a little to leave a hole
             in the middle. The sediment was quite stable. The beer was noted as being thinner in the mouth, and tasted a
             little woody, with quite a bit of astringency, and without the luscious fruity sweetness of the previous one. There
             was noticeably more alcohol in the aroma and taste than before, and the yeast only added bitterness. This was
             the least favourite so far.

             5.  26/08/2008


             Very lively in the bottle. The head developed a very small hole as it faded. The initial aromas were reminiscent of
             the 2004 version, with similar winey and sherry aspects. Cloves were back in the mix, but pleasantly balanced.
             There was a rather lively mouthfeel. Very enjoyable at the first taste, and in the finish, but for some reason the
             middle wasn’t so inspiring. The yeast didn’t really improve or detract. Generally a not bad version.

             6.  25/08/2009

             Some fizz on opening, but not a lot. The head remained in the glass on this one. Lots of good, rich aromas, toffee
             being especially prominent. Not as thick and heavy in the mouth as some of the previous ones, yet the beer had
             quite a dense oily appearance when swirled in the glass. Good profile generally in terms of aroma and taste. The
             yeast really accentuated the typical Rochefort 10 flavours and aromas. Good reviews all round.

             7.  18/05/2010

             Tiny head appeared in the bottle. A ½ cm. Head remained on the poured beer. Lumpy sediment. More complex
             aromas than the previous beers. The initial taste brought forth general noises of appreciation from the group.
             The flavours changed right over the tongue, and even noticeably over the roof of the mouth. Long lasting flavour,
             including treacle, molasses, with traces of dark chocolate orange, and even a hint of sweet coconut was detected.
             Peppery spice was noted, with strong alcohol notes. The yeast enhanced things slightly, but it was agreed this
             beer was just as good without it being added.
   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8