My buddy grabbed a case of this, we’ve been tasting it extensively. He’s a chocolate-stout-head like some people are hop-heads. His opinion on the stuff is that it’s the nectar of the gods. My take was that it lacked depth, but it was fantastic for the style.
Appearance – We never got a good head out of a single bottle of the stuff. His glassware, my glassware, whatever, it never took a head nor left any lace. What head it did take was thick, full bubbles of brown. My suggestion for improvement would have been smaller bubbles.
Smell – Like chocolate. This is where the “lack of depth” becomes a problem. Something called ‘double chocolate stout’, you expect it to smell like chocolate. But once you get saturated with the chocolate, what’s left? Stout. Except the stout isn’t there. Not even a hit of hops. It’s like some kind of malty chocolate drink, but not in a bad way.
Taste – Like chocolate. See above. Not a ton of depth but certainly not a bad, if singleminded effort.
Mouthfeel – This is where it really pisses away points. The Standard I use is Rogue Stout, or Guinness. The style should have a silky mouthfeel either from nitrobubbles or oats. The lack of complexity (and oats wouldn’t have hurt this beer flavor-wise) leads to a lack of refinement in the mouthfeel. They would be really, really onto something if they did better with “silky”, but it’s not. It’s not bad, and certainly they avoided “oily”, but it’s not fantastic either. Not impressed.
Drinkability – good for a session beer if only because it’s not complex enough to savor and base enough most people will like it.
Not bad, but not the best I’ve had either. If they had simply said “double chocolate ale” it would be easier to forgive the faults.
Serving type: bottle