In case I’ve not mentioned it in the last hour or so somewhere on social media, I co-host a podcast called A Woman’s Brew. When Siren Craft Brewery released their two variants of Twin Flames - “Classic” and “Nitro” - and put out the call to submit content trying both and giving feedback for a competition, my co-host (Joanne) and I were more than in. I had already purchased mine and hers were on the way not long after that announcement. We decided to record a mini episode for our submission where it was a straight side-by-side comparison (you can find by clicking here or listening to the audio on any of the major podcast platforms - it’s episode 006).
To give the TL;DR version of what BJCP (Beer Judge Certification Program) describes a red IPA as (to save you from googling), it's as follows:
Eyes: “Colours ranging from light reddish-amber to dark reddish-copper. Should be clear, although unfiltered dry-hopped versions may be a bit hazy" and with a medium-sized head.
Nose: “A moderate to strong fresh hop aroma featuring one or more characteristics of American or New World hops, such as tropical fruit, stone fruit, citrus, floral, spicy, berry, melon, pine, resinous, etc. Many versions are dry hopped and can have an additional fresh hop aroma; A medium-low to medium malty-sweet aroma mixes in well with the hop selection, and often features caramel, toffee, toasty, and/or dark fruit character. Fruitiness from yeast may also be detected in some versions, although a neutral fermentation character is also acceptable.”
Taste: “Hop flavor is medium to very high, and should reflect an American or New World hop character, such as citrus, floral, pine, resinous, spicy, tropical fruit, stone fruit, berry, melon, etc. Medium-high to very high hop bitterness. Malt flavor should be medium-low to medium, and is generally clean but malty-sweet up front with medium-dark caramel, toffee, toasty and/or dark fruit malt flavors. Low yeast-derived fruitiness is acceptable but not required. Dry to medium-dry finish; residual sweetness should be medium-low to none. The bitterness and hop flavor may linger into the aftertaste but should not be harsh. Medium-light to medium body, with a smooth texture. Medium to medium-high carbonation. “
Before breaking it down by the individual smells and tastes of each, they were both the same reddish-brown colour that appeared like some type of murky pond water until held up to a light (where it then came through as a cherry red hue towards the bottom of the glass). While I know that doesn’t paint them in a massively tasty-sounding way, I quite enjoyed holding it up to the light to reveal such a vibrant red colour. The head on both was fair, but I think it’s probably obvious to say that the head on the nitro was clearly thicker and far longer lasting, holding together even after you start drinking (where the classic was fluffy but dissipated quickly once the drinking began). On both accounts, they seem to match what BJCP described. Now we rewind back to the start....
We began on the Twin Flames : Classic where I got a lovely fruity aroma at the point of which I cracked the can, before even getting my nose close to the glass. I could make out hints of caramel notes as I further into the glass. In taste, it was mostly fruit with a medium bitterness. It was hard to identify where the caramelised taste ended and where the bitterness started, but the carbonation I could detect kicked in at the same part of the sip where the bitterness was noticed. I felt that overall, it was very well balanced in flavour. I would describe it as heavy and dark, though I can’t really quantify why as it just is what my mind instinctively goes to when thinking of how to describe said beer. In my opinion, it’s perfect for autumn as the colour alone reminds me of leaves just waiting to be crushed under foot. It made me think back to the Duration Märzen beer we had for Oktoberfest called Harvest Bier which I really enjoyed. For a 6.5% ABV, it was easy drinking and I think Joanne and I both felt it was fairly on the nose as far as expectation for a red IPA. Not only did it have the fruitiness as well as being hop-forward, but it was heavy with bitterness and medium levels of maltiness to enjoy - making it a great example of the style.
Having such a stunning example with the classic, we moved on to Twin Flame: Nitro, excited to see what creaminess was in store. This one was immediately fun because everybody enjoys a hard pour. While I would normally say much less thought has to go into a hard pour as you are quite literally just tipping it over and letting it spill into the glass with reckless abandon, I actually took care to try and show off by attempting a death-defying pour from great heights (E.G. created as much space between the glass and the can while liquid flowed between until it was about to overflow, as I was captured on camera with a stressed and overly-concentrated look fixed to my face). Perhaps due to to the extra thickness of the head stemming from the fact it was a nitro, there were no smells immediately noticeable. It took more effort and me shoving my nose quite far in my glass (to the point I managed to dab it in the foam) to get a faint smell of nothing massively descript. This nitro version of TF seemed to be a more muted version of the classic in terms of taste but it did have the creaminess that comes from a nitro beer with the thicker mouthfeel. The balance in the flavours of fruity and bitter were more uneven with the bitterness coming through more heavily than its fruity counterpart - unlike with the classic. I would say that I didn’t feel the flavours were as complex when compared to the classic but it did have a fuller body.
The Verdict:
In an ideal world, I would love to take the best parts of both beers (the diverse range of flavours and fragrant smell of the classic and the full, creaminess of the nitro) and bring them together to create a powerhouse beer. As we don’t live in that world at the moment - however - I can confidently say that I am on team “classic” for this showdown. As much as I do love a creamy nitro beer, the depth of flavours is definitely what wins me over. It’s something that I can see myself throwing on a jumper for and enjoying lazily by a firepit drinking before winter fully manages to take over. The best part for me was that Siren released these side-by-side and asked for the comparison. As a huge lover of the beer comparisons (if that wasn’t already abundantly clear), it really ticked the boxes for me and I really hope to see more releases like this in future - from them or any other brewery!
And with that, our entry was submitted. Spoiler alert, we did not win, but - as they say - we had fun playing.
Bonus Follow-up:
Now for a bit of insight on our podcasting sessions... After we finish recording, we usually have at least a quick follow-up chat before parting ways to do our nerdy process of photographing the beers and writing our tasting notes. On this occasion, by the time I got back to actually drinking my beer and completing my tasting notes, it had warmed up to a level where the flavours had done a bit of a switch-up on me to the point I found it interesting enough to document. While I would still firmly prefer the classic to the nitro as it seemed to more or less stay the same, the nitro ended up losing some of the harsh bitterness (to a noticeable degree). It tasted almost as if it had become more watered down as it warmed up while still maintaining the creaminess from the nitro. Also, when I comment on the harsh bitterness, it’s more because I don’t enjoy sharp bitter-lead beers as others do, so this warmer version was definitely more enjoyable to my palate.