Porter vs. Stout

[valorian]

I'm trying to get an understanding of Stouts vs. Robust Porter. At what point does a Robust Porter Recipe become a Stout? Is it the amount of Roasted Barley used?

[bluesman]

Essentially yes. A RP is a rather broad style open to brewer interpretation but it may be distinquished from Stout as lacking a STRONG roasted barley character.

[anthayes]

At what point does a Robust Porter Recipe become a Stout? Is it the amount of Roasted Barley used?

It depends who you ask.

It is well worth reading this: http://zythophile.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/so-what-is-the-difference-between-porter-and-stout/

Modern Guinness uses roast barley. Many English stouts use black malt.

Current BJCP porter and stout style guidelines make the roast barley/black malt split. British brewers don't tend to see things that way.

Ant Hayes
Tonbridge, Kent

[beerbrewingequipment]

It is well worth reading this: http://zythophile.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/so-what-is-the-difference-between-porter-and-stout/

Thanks for the link.  Porter and Stout are two of my favorite styles.

Cheers!
Travis

[dmtaylor]

I agree that it is primarily the BJCP that made the distinction based on level of roasted barley.  There is little other basis provided for calling these styles different.

Personally, I think the two styles are nearly one and the same.  I have had porters that are as black and roasty as midnight, and likewise I have had wimpy stouts.  Go back 100-200 years, and there might have been a more obvious difference.  Or, perhaps not.  But here in the 21st century, we're just making up our own garbage.  I think what it really comes down to is, if you think it's super dark and very roasty, call it a stout.  If you make another batch that turns out a little less roasty, you can call it your porter.  And vice versa.  It seems no one out there besides self-proclaimed snobs truly know or understand the difference.  And I fail to see why we call these two different styles.  Stout is historically the son of porter.  And yet now, porter has become the neglected relative of the more-popular stout.  So call it all stout if you want it to sell.  People just aren't as interested in your porter, even if it tastes a thousand times better than Guinness, and even though Guinness is little more than a cream ale with 3% roasted barley and/or black malt.

[skyler]

I think a lot of people tend to think of Porters as sweeter and Stouts as drier, but that's really just because the higher level of chocolate malt vs. roasted barley tends to make the beer seem sweeter and less bitter. At the same time, I think of a stout as being more viscous - because of how often stouts have an addition of oats or flaked barley (and because, in many instances, stouts are much bigger beers). Another somewhat flexible distinction, is that stouts should properly always be pitch black and opaque, wheras many porters are almost cola-colored, a dark garnet-brown that's not quite pitch black. But when I brew them, the key distinction is that my porters never have any unmalted grains and my stouts always have a significant roasted barley addition and typically a flaked oat or barley addition.

[weithman5]

even if it tastes a thousand times better than Guinness

everything is a thousand times better IMO   actually, i tend to like porters quite a bit and i know there is little difference, but i developed a distaste for guinness when i was in hong kong many years ago and now if something is called a stout i shy away.  go figure.

[euge]

even if it tastes a thousand times better than Guinness

everything is a thousand times better IMO   actually, i tend to like porters quite a bit and i know there is little difference, but i developed a distaste for guinness when i was in hong kong many years ago and now if something is called a stout i shy away.  go figure.

Not much of a Guinness fan myself though I certainly put enough of it away in the 90"s. To me a Stout tend to have Black Patent in it. That's the only real difference that I can see from a Porter and it really is confusing otherwise. My extreme distaste for Black Patent in a beer no matter how little has me avoiding most commercial examples, though Rogues' Shakespeare Stout is pretty darn tasty.

Take a gander at the BJCP guidelines:
Stout
Porter

[The Professor]

Take a gander at the BJCP guidelines:
Stout
Porter

An interesting read with some useful suggestions therein, as long as one does not consider it to be the definitive 'last word' regarding "styles".
The list is quite helpful in a broad sense if you're entering amateur competitions,  but outside of that the 'guidelines' should most definitely be taken with a large grain of salt.

[skyler]

Take a gander at the BJCP guidelines:
Stout
Porter

The list is quite helpful in a broad sense if you're entering amateur competitions,  but outside of that the 'guidelines' should most definitely be taken with a large grain of salt.

I'd say a pallet-full, when it comes to British styles.

[hopfenundmalz]

If the brewer says it is a porter, it is a porter.
If the brewer says it is a stout, it is a stout.

My viewpoint.

[The Professor]

If the brewer says it is a porter, it is a porter.
If the brewer says it is a stout, it is a stout.

My viewpoint.

Thank you.
Exactly.
As usual, someone has stated my opinon much more concisely than I am able.   

[jeffy]

That's what Michael Lewis says in his Classic Beer Styles book, Stout: "it is not difficult for us to decide that a stout is simply a black beer called a stout by the brewer who made it."