Cans Vs. Bottles For Your Beer. Is There Any Damn Difference? Part 1

So here’s an interesting one Beerlings…

A few days back I was browsing around on one of my favorite beer blogs BillyBrew and joined in on a “debate” which I oh so love to join. Ok, wait. There was no debate, until I came along, and now it stands as more of a question rather than a debate…screw it whatever…anyway…

Billy wrote up an article named The 5 Strongest Microbrews – In a Can and to be fair it has literally nothing to do with the question of whether or not a can or bottle is better for taste. But again, my mind wonders and so I commented (as usual) and asked Billy his thoughts on the question of whether or not there is any difference what so ever that one could distinguish between two same beers…with one bottled and one canned.

By the way, check out Billy’s post. We both very much believe that craft beer in a can is a great concept! Some of the best craft beers around come in cans and once you get over that initial perception of Crap…errr…I mean Natural Light you’ll start to see that there are actually a crap load of advantages to cans…but not always .

So to get my ADD mind back on track here….

If you’re into beer to any degree, and especially craft beer your immediate response is going to be “well f**king duh there’s going to be a difference” and that was my initial response to. Did it pan out that way though? Let’s take a look…

So for this test (I say test, but if I could do nothing but test drink beers all day I would) I turned to one of my beloved Stouts. Why Guinness of course! Comes in aluminum cans, and dark glass bottles both with that wonderful shaky ball inside. How do they get the ball inside that damn thing? Anyone?

Now before I begin, I must point out that Guinness is one of many that share both bottles and cans for the same beer, and looking back on it, it probably wasn’t the greatest choice, but I was drinking already and there was no turning back now. Hence the “part 1″ as I shall be testing more in the near future.

*QUICK NOTE: Remember! I am NOT exactly what one would call a beer reviewer, so don’t expect those damn near poetic descriptions of tastes, flavors, sensations, and how the taste damn near brought me too a euphoric…*finish the thought*…

So first…the can…the beloved and freakin’ glorious Guinness can:

The Pour

Now there’s a reason they have nicknamed Guinness “the black stuff” over there in jolly ole England. It’s almost blacker than night so there is virtually no way you’ll be able to tell of any color difference what so ever right off the bat…or ever really. But here’s what you do notice with when pouring this rich frothy goodness of a Stout into your pint glass…

It’s pours quickly (pour it right!) and smoothly. Head forms easily and stays thick through out. This was one of the biggest difference’s between the bottle and the canned one. A thick, ever lasting fluffy cream colored head. Other than this, as far as first pour impressions go…that’s it.

The First Taste

If you’ve ever had a Guinness…and if you’re reading this blog than you almost certainly have…than you know the taste well. Remember, I’m not exactly that type of “reviewer”, and this post isn’t exactly meant to review the key notes in the beer. There are better stouts out there yes, and many complain about the canned version not even coming close to the taste and feel on tap but I personally like this stout even in a can. Though I have to fully agree, nothing beats the way that it’s meant to be drunk, on tap, in a pint and at a pub.

So in getting to it, it taste like Guinness, though not exactly as it should. It feels a bit more watered down if you will, and the head stay as thick and “a float” on top as it normally does. It’s also missing some of the full flavor that one expects out of a pint of Guinness. Quality isn’t exactly on par with that from a keg and on tap, but that’s not what this post is about now is it? Let’s see how it stacks up against the bottle version.

Lacing

Now you might not think that lacing would be very important in this little test, but I think it’s more indicative of the quality difference and the way the beer is kept between bottle and can. You’ll see further down in the bottle version why I make a notice of lacing. If you don’t have a good idea of what lacing is or no clue what so ever. BillyBrew’s Beer Blog puts it perfectly: “Beer lacing adds to the appearance of a beer. A pattern of foam that clings to the glass is a beautiful sight to behold.”

I can’t say that lacing is something that I pay extreme attention to generally, but in this test, there was indeed a difference between the two versions, and I thought it would be right to make note of it. Whats the difference between the two? You’ll see further down so pay close attention to the picture, but the canned version had thinner, almost more runny and non stick lacing. Wasn’t exactly a great sign for this type of brew.

AND NOW…drum roll please…the slender black can with far more writing and label covering than needed…and which totally hides the beer from view and takes away from the experience…

The Pour

Now this isn’t the first time I’ve talked about this (it is on this blog) but I don’t like the idea of Guinness in a bottle. I’ve only had it a couple of times in the bottle and now I remember why I’ve only had it a few times this way.

Now first of all, this isn’t a beer that’s meant to be drunk out of a bottle (not talking about the Extra Stout) in my opinion, and the design of the bottle itself kills the experience if you’re drinking right out of it. Whats with all that damn plastic wrapping around the damn thing? It hides EVERYTHING! And yes, that matters.

It ends up pouring more or less the same with one slight difference. I noticed during the pour that it seems to be just SLIGHTLY lighter in color, and just barely a bit thinner in it’s pour. Once settled, I quickly came to notice the head of the beer. It’s not as thick, not as fluffy and not as creamy. It’s actually thinner. But why?

The First Taste

This is about where all the disappointment kicked right in. Taste…what taste? Seriously folks, there isn’t much to write about here towards it’s taste. There really wasn’t much of any flavor, depth or thickness to the beer. It really did feel thin, very watery and virtually tasteless. The only flavor came from the still some what creamy head (that didn’t sound right…at all).

This was actually pretty damn annoying and I was a bit disappointed in Guinness for this as I personally feel that they have sacrificed quality for the sake of marketing and $$$.

Oh well…

Lacing

This is the only area that bottle some what “won out” in my opinion over the can. Though of course lacing alone won’t make a beer…from from it actually.

The lacing was far more “stick to the sides of the glass type” and thicker than that of the can. I really don’t know why this is so if someone knows the reasons behind this comment on it please.

In the case with the bottled version, it stuck to glass in big “globs” all the way until the finish. Where as the canned version did not. Interesting…

So…um…now what and who gives a crap?

Well you read it did you not?

Really this was more of an interest and little research project inspired by Billy Brews blog post in regards to craft beer in cans. It was interesting to note the difference but I feel that I choose the wrong beer for this. But what’s done is done and part two will probably be along the lines of a IPA, Pilsner, or Lager. Guinness just really isn’t the beer for this…

…HOWEVER…There were pretty significant difference between this the bottled version and the canned version. And while this beer is still best enjoyed on tap (by a long shot), choose the can if you must. The bottled version just doesn’t taste like a true Guinness and doesn’t even fully look and pour like one.

But why?

Ah! I don’t have much of a damn clue…so for the “why” portion of this little project I turn to you…my loyal blog readers, followers and fans…*crickets*….