If I wanted water, I would have asked for water.


Monday, August 10, 2009

More Reasons to Hate Shaker Pints

In Andy Crouch's article in the current print edition of BeerAdvocate (reprinted at his blog), he points out that--never mind the cheating--these glasses just suck:
So tedious is the shaker pint’s design that breweries have taken to slapping all manners of logos across them. The shaker’s uninspired design, combined with the emblem army, discourage brewers from actively considering how their beers look to the customer. If the ubiquitous, poorly treated glass is designed to kill your beer’s head or obscure its appearance, then why bother spending time ensuring sufficient protein formation necessary to well-sustained foam? If the customer cannot see foam lacing and does not expect much in the looks department, why work for improvements? The shaker pint has bred a culture of a disappointing level of apathetic indifference in American brewers to the cause of good looking pints.
No argument here. Personally, my favorite vessel is the Irish imperial pint--the tulip/Guinness style. I know others prefer the English imperial (with the bulge), or various Belgian versions. Can we all agree, though, that the shaker is a blight and an offense to all that is wholesome and good?

2 comments:

Nate MC said...

But they are freakin cheap and I don't get mad when someone breaks them because I can buy 24 of them for $12 at Bargreen Ellinson.

Where other styles of glasses cost nearly $5 each.

I went hunting for English Imperial pint glasses and came up empty handed unless I gave them my entire wallet.

ethan john said...

the implication here is that a change in glassware would encourage consumers to pay more attention to how their beer looks, i suppose? which would then encourage better brewing somehow? that seems like a dubious conclusion at best.

Post a Comment

NOTE: Blogspot has been eating some comments, and there doesn't seem to be anything I can do about it. IF your comment doesn't appear, it's not you, it's not me, it's the genuiuses at Google. Sorry--