[denny]

Dean, as far as I know, cans are lined so that beer doesn't contact metal.  Is that wrong?

EDIT:  I haven't found any direct info on beer cans, but here's some about soda cans...

http://www.stevespanglerscience.com/experiment/00000100

I believe the final pH of beer is about the same as soda, so I'd expect beer cans to be lined for the same reasons.  But I'll keep looking for specific info.

[capozzoli]

Nyakavt, since I hadn't had any Miller in at least 4 months and didn't taste either one before the test, I could not directly or immediately say which one was from a bottle or a can... what I was able to do was put them in order as to which ones tasted the exact same... ie the two glasses that were from cans were together and the two glasses that were from bottles were together.  Try it and you'll see what I mean.  Thats what kind of surprised me, I liked the extra bitterness of the can.  The bottles are cleaner... softer might be a better word for it?

Where does the extra bitter come from.... I believe it is from contact with the aluminum.  What is the chemical name for baking soda... I can't think of it, but it reacts with aluminum as I described in the cookware test... but the concentration is higher in the cookware test and it tastes like crap.  Anyway this is just a guess but I'd say all beer has some trace amount of that chemical in it... some beer has more?

I'll dig out the bottle and can to check the date on them...

Sodium Bicarbonate?

Didn't do the blind taste test but I tried bottle vs can of Bud lite, Couldn't taste a difference. However I did play around with pouring it in a glass as well as drinking from the can and bottle. Drinking from the can does give a certain metallic feel in the mouth.

Man, I cant believe I subjected myself to that. Im gonna go wash my mouth out with caustic.





 

[nyakavt]

Nyakavt, since I hadn't had any Miller in at least 4 months and didn't taste either one before the test, I could not directly or immediately say which one was from a bottle or a can... what I was able to do was put them in order as to which ones tasted the exact same... ie the two glasses that were from cans were together and the two glasses that were from bottles were together.  Try it and you'll see what I mean.  Thats what kind of surprised me, I liked the extra bitterness of the can.  The bottles are cleaner... softer might be a better word for it?

Oh ok, I didn't realize you did them all together.  This is just as good as a triangle, even a little more difficult since you had to pair down the like beers.  Really want to try this now.

[denny]

Nyakavt, since I hadn't had any Miller in at least 4 months and didn't taste either one before the test, I could not directly or immediately say which one was from a bottle or a can... what I was able to do was put them in order as to which ones tasted the exact same... ie the two glasses that were from cans were together and the two glasses that were from bottles were together.  Try it and you'll see what I mean.  Thats what kind of surprised me, I liked the extra bitterness of the can.  The bottles are cleaner... softer might be a better word for it?

Oh ok, I didn't realize you did them all together.  This is just as good as a triangle, even a little more difficult since you had to pair down the like beers.  Really want to try this now.

The thing I keep wondering about is not that there was a difference, but why the difference was that the can seemed more bitter.  What is it about the packaging that would create that taste?

[nicneufeld]

What is it about the packaging that would create that taste?

Simplest explanation is that the beer itself was different...different batches, or more likely given BMC's ridiculously good consistency, different ages.  Longer time on the shelf for one batch perhaps.  I mean, sitting in the back of a store refrigerator for weeks is a sort of cold conditioning....  

The answer for me would be to add more beers to the group.  It would suck having to buy 8 different cases of what's generally considered not great beer, so Denny's idea of doing it in a BJCP class sounds great.  If you can increase the number of trained testers, and increase the sample set significantly of beers, then if there is a difference you should see a nice pattern emerge.  And all the different viewpoints should help define the differences too...we all use different language to describe taste sensations.  Seems like "metallic" is off the table at least, at least by this test.

[denny]

Simplest explanation is that the beer itself was different...different batches, or more likely given BMC's ridiculously good consistency, different ages.  Longer time on the shelf for one batch perhaps.  I mean, sitting in the back of a store refrigerator for weeks is a sort of cold conditioning....  

That's my first thought, too.  How do we know what was tasted is attributable to the can itself?

Seems like "metallic" is off the table at least, at least by this test.

Yep.

[babalu87]

I really dont want to do this but my curiosity is peaked now................

Going to check the dates on the bottles/cans and I'll go with Coors

[nicneufeld]

Another point of differentiation...conditioning vs force carbing.  A lot of microbrews still bottle condition I gather so one would need, when extending the tests to microbrewed samples, to ensure that the bottled samples were force carbed as well.  The difference there (between natural and force carbonation) I think would be substantial, with a refermentation and a conditioning period.  Also, I wonder about flash pasteurization, that could also account for differences.  Do they flash pasteurize before or after packaging? 

When we're done with this we can test my ability to taste "steeliness" when beers are fermented in stainless steel fermentors.    Here's an example of one such beer reeking with steel flavor:

[MDixon]

The 8% steel reserve wasn't bad, especially if someone presented it to you as a maibock.

[euge]

The 8% steel reserve wasn't bad, especially if someone presented it to you as a maibock.

Interesting...

[jwatkins56550]

Maybe it was because the cans didn't turn blue to show you it was cold enough...or it wasn't beechwood aged .  Cans are lined with plastic so there shouldn't be any contact with the metal.  Denny if you are looking for a craft beer that comes in both cans and bottles, I know Brooklyn Lager does...I'm not sure if you can get that readily in Oregon.

[glitterbug]

Maybe it was because the cans didn't turn blue to show you it was cold enough...or it wasn't beechwood aged .  Cans are lined with plastic so there shouldn't be any contact with the metal.  Denny if you are looking for a craft beer that comes in both cans and bottles, I know Brooklyn Lager does...I'm not sure if you can get that readily in Oregon.

Fat Tire also comes in bottles and cans

[mikeypedersen]

Maybe it was because the cans didn't turn blue to show you it was cold enough...or it wasn't beechwood aged .  Cans are lined with plastic so there shouldn't be any contact with the metal.  Denny if you are looking for a craft beer that comes in both cans and bottles, I know Brooklyn Lager does...I'm not sure if you can get that readily in Oregon.

Fat Tire also comes in bottles and cans

So does Moose Drool.

[dean]

This will set some of you back then too... my brother inlaw only drinks Miller HL (about 40 years now) and he won't drink it from a bottle because he prefers it from a can... and he can taste the difference.   You should have seen his face when I had him try an IPA.      I laughed so hard I almost fell out of the chair.   

[narvin]

What if the cans are actually keeping it fresher, and the taste you are getting is the true taste of Miller Lite?