Recently, I have seen lots of debate on whether craft beer dispensed by keg should automatically be considered less superior to cask beer. As a result, I’ve been trying to clarify my own opinions on the matter.
This blog post attempts to analyse the issue from my point of view. I have not fully formulated my own views yet, so it may ask as many questions as it answers. Also, while my knowledge of these matters is almost certainly above average, I make no claim to be an authority on the brewing process or cellarmanship.
So, here goes…
Let’s take as a starting point the question: is cask beer better than keg?
The first thing we need to do is define what we mean by “better than”. That’s too wide a description. I think the average drinker is probably concerned with how their pint tastes, so let’s take “better than” to mean “better tasting than”. (Let’s also assume that we are concerned with the opinions only of the discerning drinker: one who appreciates quality, yet may or may not understand the technicalities of the brewing process or cellarmanship.)
So, our new question is: is cask beer better-tasting than keg, to the discerning drinker?
Logically, if cask beer is definitively better-tasting than keg, then the worst cask beer in the world must be better-tasting than the best keg beer in the world, to the discerning drinker. Obviously, taste is a matter of – well – taste; but aside from the occasional zealous keg-basher, I expect you’d find very few knowledgeable punters who would assert that this is true.
It strikes me, though, that perhaps there are two separate questions here: one concerning the end product, and one concerning the dispense mechanism.
We’ve already established that, in terms of the end product, it’s very difficult to support the argument that any given cask beer is automatically better than any given keg beer. However, how does keg as a dispense mechanism compare to cask?
Now, cask beer is, by definition, unpasteurised and undergoes a second fermentation in the barrel. Keg, meanwhile, is (usually) pasteurised, does not (usually) undergo secondary fermentation in the barrel, and is served to the bar under blanket gas pressure – sometimes leading to the gas dissolving into the beer.
So, cask dispense clearly offers a much closer representation to the beer in its natural state.
However, does that necessarily make keg worse as a dispense mechanism? Well, keg has one clear advantage: the cellar life is vastly extended, thus significantly reducing the chance of a bad pint being served through poor cellarmanship.
Arguably, keg’s biggest advantage – its cellar life – could be resolved through better cellarmanship. If the publican is any good, then (s)he won’t be serving dodgy pints on a regular basis, irrespective of the dispense method used. And pasteurising will inevitably impact upon the flavour of the beer: this is why the most flavoursome cheeses are sold unpasteurised.
What of the argument that the gassy flavour spoils the beer? Well, how many drinks do we deliberately carbonate – from water to soft drinks? There could even be an argument (albeit not one which I support) that carbonation enhances the beer. So, this is a matter of personal preference.
The only conclusive way to determine the superior dispense method would be to conduct a blind tasting of the same beers, from the same batch, served through both mechanisms. In the absence of this data, I can only go with a gut feeling.
In my opinion, cask is the better dispense mechanism, as it presents the beer in its more natural state. The fewer processes applied which could adversely affect the flavour of the beer, the better, in my view.
But that’s just a personal preference.
So, while I would suggest that cask is the better dispense method, I won’t dismiss any given beer out of hand simply because it’s served on keg.