Revisit: Trafalgar Ales & Meads 7


I don’t have a sense for how long people have been following the blog, but if you started reading back in 2010, you’ll know that I had pretty strong opinions about Trafalgar. At that point, we were living in a 40 brewery Ontario and Trafalgar was down amongst the bottom of the heap with things like Old Credit and Wolfgang’s. I wrote a post about them you can see by clicking here. It was fairly gentle, considering. I didn’t like the way their labels kept changing. At the time I didn’t have the context I do now. If I had been reviewing them then with the context I have now, it would have been worse.

Searching through the archive, I find I also wrote this paragraph:

Trafalgar Bert Well Pale Ale will be the absolute last chance I’m ever going to give Trafalgar and if it isn’t any good I am going to rain down fire and brimstone upon them with such intensity that it will raise the temperature of the blogosphere by several dozen degrees. They are already on double secret probation for Korruptor and I for one have very little difficulty seeing the benefit of hastening along Ontario beer Darwinism.

I’ve been keeping tabs on things coming out of the brewery over the years. Some of the Black Creek beers that they’ve been contracting have been very good. Some of their one offs have been questionable. The bottle of Saison I purchased by Brasserie des Quatres Lunes was brewed there and somehow managed to soak through the cork, which is something I’d never seen before. It was an unqualified drain pour. It was terrible.

Part of being a good critic is being honest and being open to the idea that things can and sometimes do change. Earlier this year, Trafalgar won a number of awards at the Ontario Brewing Awards. They also won “best newcomer.”

I’ve tallied votes for the Canadian Brewing Awards four times, so I feel comfortable telling you this even if it means that I never get to do it again: An award doesn’t really tell you very much on an ongoing basis except that the beer has achieved a certain level of quality. An award means that on that day in that room to those judges with their understanding of BJCP criteria, the beer was an exemplar of the style category it was submitted in. This doesn’t mean that awards are nonsense. If you see one brewery win a lot of them, it means they’re performing well according to a Michael Jackson/AHA/BJCP defined context. All of the awards judging I’ve ever been involved with has been conducted in good faith based on principles of fairness.

That means that when you win as many awards in one fell swoop as Trafalgar did this year, you’re probably due for a revisit.

The newcomer thing has to be addressed. Trafalgar isn’t a newcomer. Trafalgar started when I was 13. Giving a 22 year old brewery a newcomer award is the kind of asinine decision that makes people take you less seriously. It’s like awarding Justin Bieber “Cutest Toddler.” I know the justification was that they had not entered the Ontario Brewing Awards in five years. That doesn’t make them a newcomer. 60 breweries started in 2014. This is pretty cut and dry. I feel like running that decision by literally anyone would have been a good move. “Most Improved” would have been fine.

I sent Connor at Trafalgar my address and the following picture. 7e3

He sent me six beers from the Trafalgar Black Label series. What follows is the upshot:

Big Hefe: A 5% wheat beer, Big Hefe is really more of a Kristalweizen due to its clarity and carbonation. It’s more like an American Wheat Beer than anything else if only because of the filtration. The aroma is still clove and a little bit of banana with some chalky grain and a wheaty tang towards the back. It has quite a rocky head, and the iso-amyl acetate suggests it fermented fairly warm. It is a touch too sweet for me, but it’s objectively pretty good.IMAG1190[1]

Wee Beastie (second on the operating principle of low IBU to high): An 8.5% Scotch Ale, this is throwing aromas of toffee, grape, raisin and grape nuts with some booze in the background. There’s a touch of licorice peeking through at the back of the palate. There are other dark fruit characters at play here, but I feel like the body could be a little thicker. I think that some texture would take care of the bitterness which is a little on the high side. That’s a minor quibble. I have had worse Scotch Ales than this. Also, the name is clever (if already taken by Howe Sound.)

Schwartzy: A 5% alcohol Milk Stout, this might have been leaking carbonation. The aroma doesn’t present the lactose in a creamy way and to be honest it’s more of an American Stout than anything else. There’s smoke, chocolate and a small amount of roast. There’s a really lingering bitterness and astringency from the malt. Of the six this turns out to be maybe the poorest bottle.

However.IMAG1193[1]

Schwartzy Xpresso: Also at 5%, Schwartzy Xpresso pours with a big fluffy head and the coffee here seems to bring out the lactose in the milk stout, creating a creamy character. There’s a little vanilla and I’m actively reminded of Dieu Du Ciel Aphrodisiaque. The difference is the texture. This is aggressively carbed and that spikiness takes away a little from what could be a really smooth texture. This could easily have won an award.

Stinger: An 8% Dry Hopped IPA, this is really leaning in the direction of Torpedo. I think that the dry hopping here might be citra because of the vibrant lemon and (maybe it’s because I broke 5kg of Marynka with my bare hands the other day) I’m getting raw whole cone vegetal notes. I think they really dry hopped the hell out of this. There is something in the malt bill I don’t quite like, but I’ve had many worse IPAs than this. From other OCB members. Recently. It is another example of a name that’s already taken (by Mill Street).

IMAG1194[1]

Eclipse: The Imperial Stout. It’s quite simple and is basically exactly to style. No flaws, but not much joy either.

I wanted to believe. I don’t know if I do. There are serious problems.

For one thing, the fill lines in the bottles that they sent were inconsistent. One near the cap and one near the bottom of the neck. This and the crimps on the bottle caps lead me to believe that they are probably manually bottling the beers in their black label series. I hope that they will listen to me when I suggest improving their processes to eliminate inconsistency in packaging. As I checked the beers in on untappd people got in touch via twitter and facebook and email to tell me about their experiences with bottles that had been undercarbed or had gone wrong in some way. The focus needs to be on consistency if Trafalgar is going to claw back some reputation. People talk now more than ever.

Additionally, it’s important to recognize that you don’t exist in a vacuum. Using names that other people are already using just signals a basic lack of market research. Yes, it’s hard to come up with a new name, but it’s not so hard that it’s worth eventually getting sued over.

The upshot is this: Three of the beers that Trafalgar sent over (Wee Beastie, Schwartzy Xpresso, Stinger) would absolutely have been worthy of award consideration. In the right room on the right day in front of the right judges, they’d win. That’s a hell of an improvement and at some point in the near future they might think seriously about switching out a couple of LCBO skus with their black label stock. Once they get their processes squeaky clean, of course.


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

7 thoughts on “Revisit: Trafalgar Ales & Meads

    • admin Post author

      I think the fill line and manual crimp are the sorts of problems that lead to the biological issues. If they can address that it’ll improve things in the long term. Anyone can make good beer. It’s hard to make good beer consistently.

  • Albino Rhino

    I remember having a very long conversation with Ed *brewmaster at Black Creek* about how he would get angry when people commented and ranted about a brewer making bad beer because no brewer makes bad beer on purpose….my counter point was when you are not correcting the problems that are causing the bad beer then you are in turn actually making bad beer on purpose.

  • JeffH

    My thing with Trafalgar is that we always seem to want them to get a little bit better – we’ve been wanting it for years, and I don’t know quite why…why have we invested so much hope in this brewery that they will improve (me, included)? On the other hand, I wonder if they will ever get a fair shake because of their past.

    One last thing – have they ever considered just ditching the bottling for a while and keg and just sell the decent beers they make to licencees? If there were kegs of the IPA or the Imperial Stout at places like C’est What or Bar Hop, it might pique more interest…Remember the first time we all tried Boneshaker on tap and how floored we all were?

    Maybe that can happen with them.

    • admin Post author

      Now that’s a very good point. What if they switched the model? You could easily build a rep on keg sales with two of the beers I tried. The IPA is surprisingly good and the Xpresso Schwartzy is really… Well, it’s better than good. Why not try a few cheeky keg customers in Hamilton and Oakville? I bet you could really move some product.

  • PC

    Much higher margin on bottle sales vs. keg sales is probably the answer.

    Plenty of breweries are manually bottling their beers – 5 Paddles, Left Field, Rainhard, Junction Craft … they don’t seem to have the problems Trafalgar has always had.

    And RE: Ed at Black Creek – the beers you get at the pioneer village are outstanding. Some of the historic releases that Trafalgar brewed were also really good (Rifleman’s Ration & Montgomery’s Courage in particular) but even the good ones were inconsistent in mouthfeel and carbonation. I’d agree with Albino Rhino – if you do nothing to address the problems you are essentially making bad beer on purpose. Oxidation, mouthfeel, inconsistent carbonation – these are really basic issues that can be easily addressed.

    And to me, one of the the worst things about Trafalgar is that they keep fooling us into buying beer they’ve brewed by constantly changing their (amateurish) branding. I guess it’s not their fault – maybe they’re actually trying to improve their product but something tells me that it’s only about the bottom line at that brewery.

    • admin Post author

      Indeed. A stable branding platform across all aspects of their business would help them a lot. If you want to be an artisanal producer, you’ve got to own your creations.