Beer snobs must worse than wine snobs

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Exactly. Even Dominoes came out a couple years ago and basically said "yeah, we sold a shit ton of pizza thanks to our advertising, and everyone kept telling us our pizza sucked elephant balls. So, we changed the recipe to something that only sucks donkey balls. You're welcome." Dominoes is a prime example of how marketing can trump a crappy product.

This thread is now about pizza snobs.

Pizza snobs from NYC are the worst kind of snobs. They just say, "you can't get a good pizza outside NYC and your local chain doesn't compare."

Well, fuck you, we aren't in NYC, douchebag.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
A good TV is measurably and objectively better than a bad TV. You won't ever have someone look at them side by side and say they think the crappy one is better - but they may say that they don't think the better one is worth the price premium.

"Good" beer is subjectively better than "bad" beer. Very often - probably more often than not - a person will taste both and say they prefer the taste of the "bad" beer. But beer snobs tell us we're wrong, we aren't supposed to prefer the taste of the "bad" beer, we just don't know better.

That's why beer snobs are snobs and why there is no such thing as a TV snob.

Macrobrew beers are objectively worse because of the ingredients they use. Rice is used in shitty beer and was only added because it is cheap.

Just because you don't have a palate attuned to the taste of beer, doesn't mean there aren't gradations of quality.
 

MrX8503

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2005
4,529
0
0
And people wouldn't buy them if they didn't like them, or at least not dislike them enough to pay higher prices for better beer.

If Americans have shitty taste, it's not caused by the market. Manufacturers haven't "forced" anyone to drink shitty beer. It sells because people like it.

You should watch Beer Wars.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
Just because you like something doesn't mean its good.

If I give a 5 year-old child a shitty, rusted bike, he'll probably be happy and say its great and he loves that bike. If I give that same bike to Lance Armstrong, he'd probably toss it and say its garbage. That's because Lance Armstrong has ridden enough bikes to know what makes a good bike. The difference of opinion here doesn't come from Lance being a snob, instead it comes from the ignorance of the child.
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,483
8,344
126
But what if I know something is shitty and still like it? I can enjoy a tasty Belgian Quad and I can enjoy High Life Light.

Just like I can enjoy a $40 bone in ribeye and turn around the next day and eat $1 McDouble.

People like me really gets the snobs' knickers in a twist.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
But what if I know something is shitty and still like it? I can enjoy a tasty Belgian Quad and I can enjoy High Life Light.

Just like I can enjoy a $40 bone in ribeye and turn around the next day and eat $1 McDouble.

People like me really gets the snobs' knickers in a twist.

I'm the same way. Most "snobs" are, too, probably, if we define snobs as whats in the OP. The OP has no taste for beer. He blames the difference of opinion between him and snobs as being due to their snobbery, rather than due to his ignorance.

Taste is something that can be learned like anything else, you learn to appreciate the qualities of various beers and are then qualified to judge them for other beer enthusiasts. It is not just 'Drink. Like? yes/no.' By that standard Busch is just as good as a Belgian tripel. I answer yes to both.
 

LordMorpheus

Diamond Member
Aug 14, 2002
6,871
1
0
Back to the OP: I drink a ton of Shock Top. It's not my favorite, but of the beers that I can get for 1$/16oz at the grad student happy hour every friday, it's the best.

Hmm, now that the semester is going, those should be starting up again.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
But what if I know something is shitty and still like it? I can enjoy a tasty Belgian Quad and I can enjoy High Life Light.

Just like I can enjoy a $40 bone in ribeye and turn around the next day and eat $1 McDouble.

People like me really gets the snobs' knickers in a twist.

I'll drink shitty rice beer at a party without complaint (I won't be THAT guy) & I'll drink shitty rice beer for personal budgetary reasons. I eat entirely too much fast food, too. And I'll fucking enjoy it (well, not the fastfood, really). But, I won't justify it to myself by saying that there is no objective difference in quality between macros and craft brews.

the antisnobs here are doing just that. They're saying that the difference in quality is absolutely subjective and that whatever 'taste' we beer snobs have is all in our minds.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
That's why beer snobs are snobs and why there is no such thing as a TV snob.


Have you met that Fritzo guy? Oh, and TridenT.
they seem incapable of seeing the qualitative differences that the rest of us can see.
 

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
But what if I know something is shitty and still like it? I can enjoy a tasty Belgian Quad and I can enjoy High Life Light.

Just like I can enjoy a $40 bone in ribeye and turn around the next day and eat $1 McDouble.

People like me really gets the snobs' knickers in a twist.



yeah I'm this guy too.


(back to OP):
shock top is legit beer, but to expect it to get an A is funny.


back to pizza snobbery:
I can enjoy some NY style pizza, but I find chicago style to be 'superior' and think its harder to make a great deep pie. but that doesnt make thin crust pizza not pizza or automatically suck balls


My TV is better than yours....


wine sucks


I think I got all the bases covered...
 
Last edited:

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
30,031
45,261
136
I'll drink shitty rice beer at a party without complaint (I won't be THAT guy) & I'll drink shitty rice beer for personal budgetary reasons. I eat entirely too much fast food, too. And I'll fucking enjoy it (well, not the fastfood, really). But, I won't justify it to myself by saying that there is no objective difference in quality between macros and craft brews.

the antisnobs here are doing just that. They're saying that the difference in quality is absolutely subjective and that whatever 'taste' we beer snobs have is all in our minds.

After 3-4 beers the taste doesn't matter anymore....
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
I'll drink shitty rice beer at a party without complaint (I won't be THAT guy) & I'll drink shitty rice beer for personal budgetary reasons. I eat entirely too much fast food, too. And I'll fucking enjoy it (well, not the fastfood, really). But, I won't justify it to myself by saying that there is no objective difference in quality between macros and craft brews.

the antisnobs here are doing just that. They're saying that the difference in quality is absolutely subjective and that whatever 'taste' we beer snobs have is all in our minds.

Hold on there slugger, I didn't say that quality is subjective. The "quality" of a beer can be objectively measured against an arbitrary set of standards for what is good quality. If a quality beer should not contain rice, then a beer containing rice is low quality. Fine, I haven't said anything to the contrary.

I'm talking about taste. There is a difference between taste and quality, though I'm not sure you understand that since you seemed to use them interchangeably right now. A better quality beer doesn't necessarily taste better than a lower quality beer, because taste is subjective.

I like milk chocolate; I don't like dark chocolate. You can give me the highest quality dark chocolate money can buy, and I'd still rather eat a Hershey's milk chocolate bar. I just prefer the taste of milk chocolate - dark chocolate is too bitter for me, just like pretty much every expensive beer I've had (except Hoegaarden and similar). Chocolate snobs prefer dark chocolate, I can't stand it.

I drink Miller Lite or Rolling Rock because I prefer the taste. I have tasted other beers and I have subjectively judged Miller Lite and Rolling Rock to taste better. My preference. I won't dispute that there are higher quality beers, but that's not my issue with beer snobs. My issue is that beer snobs say I'm not supposed to prefer the taste of Miller Lite to their beers. If you can suggest a quality beer that tastes similar to Miller Lite (or MGD) or Rolling Rock, I'd happily try it as long as I can find it locally. Don't care about price, I don't drink cheap beer because of the price. I would actually like suggestions, just don't suggest something that tastes bitter.


Everyone has their things that they are more into than most people. One of yours is beer; mine are pizza and board games. I can see real parallels between board games and beer. I look at what people like me pick as the 10 best board games of all time, and 8 of them are games that I wouldn't even consider trying to play with most people. And I wouldn't consider playing Monopoly myself. But the thing is, we don't expect everyone to like our games. I'd call them better "quality" games, but your enjoyment of a game is based on your taste - which is subjective. A lot of people enjoy Monopoly or Risk. They aren't wrong. And if they played Agricola, there's a good chance they'd want to go back to Monopoly.

The thing that bugs me about beer snobs is that they act like they'd rather drink out of a urinal than drink my Miller Lite. Since you said you'll drink "shitty rice beer" I don't think I'd call you a beer snob.

I really would like some recommendations if there are quality beers that a Miller Lite drinker is likely to enjoy.
 

dr150

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2003
6,570
24
81
All these wine and beer reviews are BS.

As John Cleese pointed out with his wine experiment party. People rated different wines of different price categories differently. There was no consensus which was better between expensive "top rated" wines and cheaper wines.

Your own specific taste buds determine what is good to YOU.

I've had the "best rated" beers and wines and have found most of their hype is only hype....with a self fulfilling prophecy--lemming effect: "Oh, if the Wine Spectator says its good, then I must ALSO rate it high".

The best way to try out good stuff is to have a friend who has similar taste buds to you. That way, when he finds something that is good to HIM, you'll also most likely find it good as well.
 

TheNinja

Lifer
Jan 22, 2003
12,207
1
0
I have a "wine club" with friends. Everyone brings a bottle and we put them in identical plastic bags. Then you pour it out and nobody knows what they are drinking. We'll taste like 8 wines in a night (like 8 merlots 1 time, 8 pinot the next time, etc.) and rate them on appearance, aroma, and taste. Anyway, usually people rate the wines quite similar. Of course people have different pallets but in general, if a wine is "good" everyone rates it high and if a wine is "bad" everyone typically rates it low.

That being said, the more expensive wines don't always win. All of our wines are in the $4 - $15 category though but quite often a $5 bottle will beat a $10 bottle. 1 time someone brought a $35 bottle for kicks and it won the night easily though...so you never know. The key is to taste a bunch of different types of wine/beer over time and find out what style you like and get those.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
The majority of beer is bought at supermarkets and convenience marts. Good beer is not found at either. If Chimay sold for the same price as Bud AND, they spent as much advertising as AB does, no one would drink Bud.

I definitely blame the large American breweries and supermarket chains for the continued crap offerings. People aren't born with good taste or, bad taste for that matter, it is learned.

Taste is not influenced by economics. Taste does not influence economics, although it should. What influences taste is marketing and national accounts which make brands like Bud and MickyD's recognizable from coast to coast. For me, the beer I drink is a personal choice made after considerable thought and comparison. For most, beer is a matter of grabbing a recognized label.

Marketing is the key. Americans have AB ads shoved down their throats for their entire lives so of course they are more likely to go for one of these brands. One example, when you go to a sports game, all you can really get are ML and BL. However, I have seen some progress in this area... recently I went to a Caps game and they had an international beer stand with many different types of good imports. I think more and more stadiums are adding better selection but it also depends on the target audience. Breaking out of the "cold, cheap shtty beer (Coors/BL/ML) is best" mentality takes some effort that many Americans are too lazy to do.
 

preslove

Lifer
Sep 10, 2003
16,754
63
91
Hold on there slugger, I didn't say that quality is subjective. The "quality" of a beer can be objectively measured against an arbitrary set of standards for what is good quality. If a quality beer should not contain rice, then a beer containing rice is low quality. Fine, I haven't said anything to the contrary.

I'm talking about taste. There is a difference between taste and quality, though I'm not sure you understand that since you seemed to use them interchangeably right now. A better quality beer doesn't necessarily taste better than a lower quality beer, because taste is subjective.

I like milk chocolate; I don't like dark chocolate. You can give me the highest quality dark chocolate money can buy, and I'd still rather eat a Hershey's milk chocolate bar. I just prefer the taste of milk chocolate - dark chocolate is too bitter for me, just like pretty much every expensive beer I've had (except Hoegaarden and similar). Chocolate snobs prefer dark chocolate, I can't stand it.

I drink Miller Lite or Rolling Rock because I prefer the taste. I have tasted other beers and I have subjectively judged Miller Lite and Rolling Rock to taste better. My preference. I won't dispute that there are higher quality beers, but that's not my issue with beer snobs. My issue is that beer snobs say I'm not supposed to prefer the taste of Miller Lite to their beers. If you can suggest a quality beer that tastes similar to Miller Lite (or MGD) or Rolling Rock, I'd happily try it as long as I can find it locally. Don't care about price, I don't drink cheap beer because of the price. I would actually like suggestions, just don't suggest something that tastes bitter.

Those are both low quality American adjunct lagers. They are objectively bad because of the ingredients and manufacturing processes used to make them. They have very little flavor and taste watery. There are many, many, many better lagers out there that don't have hoppy bitterness (I assume that this is the taste that turns you off). Instead of being defensive, you should say "I l like Miller lite, rolling rock, and Hoegaarden. What are some good beers to try?"

You shouldn't let your dislike for bitterness get in the way of enjoying good beer.


Everyone has their things that they are more into than most people. One of yours is beer; mine are pizza and board games. I can see real parallels between board games and beer. I look at what people like me pick as the 10 best board games of all time, and 8 of them are games that I wouldn't even consider trying to play with most people. And I wouldn't consider playing Monopoly myself. But the thing is, we don't expect everyone to like our games. I'd call them better "quality" games, but your enjoyment of a game is based on your taste - which is subjective. A lot of people enjoy Monopoly or Risk. They aren't wrong. And if they played Agricola, there's a good chance they'd want to go back to Monopoly.

As someone who has had a few board game nerd friends and played some of the better games (I've loved the few games of settlers of catan I've played), I would say that someone who likes risk over other strategy games, at the very least, has "unrefined taste." I will readily admit to being a board game neophyte, with less educated tastes than a board game nerd such as yourself. And I would NEVER argue with you that Candy Land is comparable to a good German board game. In fact, I would ask for advice and seek knowledge about board games from you and your ilk. See, the difference here is that I am willing to admit that my taste in board games isn't as developed as yours, because I haven't spent the time to educate myself on the topic.

Now, if a board game 'snob' went to a social gathering and said "Monopoly sucks, I'm not playing it," then they are just assholes with no social skills.

The thing that bugs me about beer snobs is that they act like they'd rather drink out of a urinal than drink my Miller Lite. Since you said you'll drink "shitty rice beer" I don't think I'd call you a beer snob.

I really would like some recommendations if there are quality beers that a Miller Lite drinker is likely to enjoy.

Since you like lagers without a lot of hops, I would recommend you try German Pilsners, which have less of a hop bitterness than their Czech counterparts. Here is a good list: http://beeradvocate.com/articles/216 -- Read through the blurbs and avoid the ones with that say that they have a lot of hop flavor. Warsteiner is definitely a good one to start out with, because it isn't too expensive and isn't bitter, at all.

You said that you like Hoegaarden. That is a pretty decent Belgian Witbier (a belgian style wheat beer). I'm not too familiar with Witbiers, but here is a list of them with ratings: http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/48

I'm more familiar with the south german style wheat beer, hefeweizen, which is similar (obviously, they're wheat based). It's sweet and not bitter. Two good & easy to find examples are Franziskaner & Sierra Nevada Kellerweis Hefeweizen. Here's a good list: http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/89

You can also look into Belgian Pale Ales, which are MUCH less bitter than many of the faddish, overhopped (and very bitter) American Pale Ales. http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/55 & http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/54. Duvel, though expensive, is heaven. It is sweet and creamy, not bitter.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2006
11,036
11
91
I have a "wine club" with friends. Everyone brings a bottle and we put them in identical plastic bags. Then you pour it out and nobody knows what they are drinking. We'll taste like 8 wines in a night (like 8 merlots 1 time, 8 pinot the next time, etc.) and rate them on appearance, aroma, and taste. Anyway, usually people rate the wines quite similar. Of course people have different pallets but in general, if a wine is "good" everyone rates it high and if a wine is "bad" everyone typically rates it low.

That being said, the more expensive wines don't always win. All of our wines are in the $4 - $15 category though but quite often a $5 bottle will beat a $10 bottle. 1 time someone brought a $35 bottle for kicks and it won the night easily though...so you never know. The key is to taste a bunch of different types of wine/beer over time and find out what style you like and get those.

Cost isn't 100% of a wine though. Yes many times a cheaper wine can beat a more expensive wine, and many times name itself causes an inflation of cost. Cost USUALLY indicates a high probability that the wine is a damn good wine assuming stored right and mature enough.

But a seasoned wine expert would already know this. Everyone knows that there are damn good cheaper wines that beat out other expensive ones. Some years might be amazing compared to other years. There are tons of variables that make up how good a wine tastes.

However, enjoying wine is still important. The most expensive wine in the world might not appeal to you if you don't like that it has too strong of a taste, or if the fruitiness of it doesn't suit you.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Those are both low quality American adjunct lagers. They are objectively bad because of the ingredients and manufacturing processes used to make them. They have very little flavor and taste watery. There are many, many, many better lagers out there that don't have hoppy bitterness (I assume that this is the taste that turns you off). Instead of being defensive, you should say "I l like Miller lite, rolling rock, and Hoegaarden. What are some good beers to try?"

You shouldn't let your dislike for bitterness get in the way of enjoying good beer.

??? I wasn't being defensive. I essentially asked exactly what you said I should ask, with the exception that I never said I like Hoegaarden (just that it's not bitter).

As someone who has had a few board game nerd friends and played some of the better games (I've loved the few games of settlers of catan I've played), I would say that someone who likes risk over other strategy games, at the very least, has "unrefined taste." I will readily admit to being a board game neophyte, with less educated tastes than a board game nerd such as yourself. And I would NEVER argue with you that Candy Land is comparable to a good German board game. In fact, I would ask for advice and seek knowledge about board games from you and your ilk. See, the difference here is that I am willing to admit that my taste in board games isn't as developed as yours, because I haven't spent the time to educate myself on the topic.

I've never said Miller Lite is comparable to expensive beers, I just said I think it tastes better than the expensive beers I've had. In the same way that Monopoly isn't comparable to Agricola, but a lot of people would enjoy Monopoly more than Agricola. I wouldn't even try to play Agricola with most people I know. So I could say that Agricola is a "better" game, but enjoyability is subjective and in that regard many people would rate Monopoly higher. And who am I to tell them they shouldn't enjoy playing Monopoly? Same with beer - objectively you can say a beer is better because it uses better ingredients. But taste is subjective, and who can say what tastes better other than the person who is tasting?

Now, if a board game 'snob' went to a social gathering and said "Monopoly sucks, I'm not playing it," then they are just assholes with no social skills.



Since you like lagers without a lot of hops, I would recommend you try German Pilsners, which have less of a hop bitterness than their Czech counterparts. Here is a good list: http://beeradvocate.com/articles/216 -- Read through the blurbs and avoid the ones with that say that they have a lot of hop flavor. Warsteiner is definitely a good one to start out with, because it isn't too expensive and isn't bitter, at all.

You said that you like Hoegaarden. That is a pretty decent Belgian Witbier (a belgian style wheat beer). I'm not too familiar with Witbiers, but here is a list of them with ratings: http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/48

I'm more familiar with the south german style wheat beer, hefeweizen, which is similar (obviously, they're wheat based). It's sweet and not bitter. Two good & easy to find examples are Franziskaner & Sierra Nevada Kellerweis Hefeweizen. Here's a good list: http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/89

You can also look into Belgian Pale Ales, which are MUCH less bitter than many of the faddish, overhopped (and very bitter) American Pale Ales. http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/55 & http://beeradvocate.com/beer/style/54. Duvel, though expensive, is heaven. It is sweet and creamy, not bitter.

Thanks, I'll check out Warsteiner and Duvel at least if I can find them. I think I've seen at least one of those at Wegman's, they have a surprisingly good selection of premium beers.
 

slayer202

Lifer
Nov 27, 2005
13,679
119
106
But what if I know something is shitty and still like it? I can enjoy a tasty Belgian Quad and I can enjoy High Life Light.

Just like I can enjoy a $40 bone in ribeye and turn around the next day and eat $1 McDouble.

People like me really gets the snobs' knickers in a twist.

umm no, as long as you realize the $40 ribeye kicks the fuck out of the mcdouble. no one is saying don't drink bud light, just that it's shit for beer
 

Sukhoi

Elite Member
Dec 5, 1999
15,332
95
91
??? I wasn't being defensive. I essentially asked exactly what you said I should ask, with the exception that I never said I like Hoegaarden (just that it's not bitter).



I've never said Miller Lite is comparable to expensive beers, I just said I think it tastes better than the expensive beers I've had. In the same way that Monopoly isn't comparable to Agricola, but a lot of people would enjoy Monopoly more than Agricola. I wouldn't even try to play Agricola with most people I know. So I could say that Agricola is a "better" game, but enjoyability is subjective and in that regard many people would rate Monopoly higher. And who am I to tell them they shouldn't enjoy playing Monopoly? Same with beer - objectively you can say a beer is better because it uses better ingredients. But taste is subjective, and who can say what tastes better other than the person who is tasting?



Thanks, I'll check out Warsteiner and Duvel at least if I can find them. I think I've seen at least one of those at Wegman's, they have a surprisingly good selection of premium beers.

I'd try some other stuff before Duvel. Back when I didn't like fancy beers I remember getting a big bottle of Duvel in the middle of a bar crawl because it was the only thing on sale at the liquor store, and I thought it was awful. I'd probably like it now, but I haven't had any since that day.

Also look at these lists of pilsners.
http://beeradvocate.com/lists/style/41
http://beeradvocate.com/lists/style/40
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,125
30,076
146
Whenever someone uses the word "elitist," I immediately consider that person an illiterate pus bucket.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,164
1,637
126
Pizza snobs from NYC are the worst kind of snobs. They just say, "you can't get a good pizza outside NYC and your local chain doesn't compare."

Well, fuck you, we aren't in NYC, douchebag.

That's because they haven't tried a Chicago pizza :)