What the hell is the difference between a porter and a stout?

[Silver_Is_Money]

Stout was originally merely a descriptor (or classifier) of a specific category of Porter. Stout is akin to the descriptive word "robust". It is also akin to the descriptive term "wee heavy". A rather (to outright) robust (or heavy) Porter was described as (or classified as) a stout Porter. Stout is an adjective, not a noun.

All Stouts are Porters, but not all Porters are stout.

The roasted barley or no roasted barley thing is (well accepted) modern fantasy.

 

[Qhrumphf]

I thought IPAs were overhopped to make the journey to India...regular Pale Ales would not have survived the trip.

Another topic well discussed elsewhere, but that's more myth than reality.

 

[bwible]

Stouts are generally lower in alcohol and black patent is a stout ingredient that has no place in a porter. Guinness, for example is about 4.5% alcohol - though many people think it’s stronger. Porters are generally higher in alcohol. You will find porters that are 6.5%. You will not find a stout that is 6.5% except where people have this tendency today to throw all the rules out the window and add the word ‘imperial’ to the style. Yes there is some crossover. But they are far from the same thing.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

In the 1700's Porters were apparently brewed with 100% brown malt (which must have retained some degree of diastatic power unless brown malt back then was actually caramel/crystal malt). The name as it relates to beer goes back to at least 1721.

 

[Samlbowles]

I was thinking more to the original use of the word stout. I don't think the Irish Stouts we know where brewed before the term started to be use.

This is actually true. When we think of stout, we tend to think of Guinness, which the Guinness Draught we all know and love wasn't released until 1959.

I agree with most on here that the difference is Roasted Barley...sometimes. I have been to the Guinness Storehouse twice now and the following is the story they give.

Back in the 19th century, the water in Ireland was undrinkable. The dockworkers were unable to drink water throughout the day and some even died of dehydration. Arthur Guinness started brewing a dark session beer that could be drank throughout the day. He called this beer a porter because it was made for the dockworkers at port to drink all day while they worked and they would not get drunk.

This is the first beer brewed by Arthur Guinness, the Dublin Porter. He routed water coming off the Wicklow Mountains into the brewery and they use that water to this day.

As for the stout, they decided to make a drier, lighter, dark beer and have a strong roasted character.

The Dublin Porter is light-medium bodied and low ABV, just like the Guinness Draught, but is a lot sweeter and has no roasted character.

The Guinness Draught is light, very dry, and uses ~600 SRM roasted barley to brew the beer. It is VERY heavily roasted and very dry.

When you think Porter, think sweet and chocolate with a coffee flavor character (not a char, roasty character at all)

When you think of a Stout, think Dry, Dark Roast Coffee. It really is just a harsher, not sweet, version of a porter.

This is where the term "Stout Porter" came from back in the day. They wanted something stronger but close to the flavor. Hence, Stout was born.

I am by no means an authority, this is just what I learned from Guinness and my own opinions on the differences of the style. I hope this helps!

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

Porter existed as a beer style long before Guinness, so who should grant Guinness the right to decide upon these matters?

Porter dates to 1721. Guinness dates only to 1787, and didn't call anything solely a Stout until 1840. Before then, they called it Porter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porter_(beer)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stout

 

[Ninoid]

Stout is Irish version of Porter.

 

[InspectorJon]

Just in case there is any confusion porter is on the left and stout is on the right. That should clear everything up.

 

[odie]

Just in case there is any confusion porter is on the left and stout is on the right. That should clear everything up.
View attachment 657275

One looks darker. Probably the light...lol

 

[Miraculix]

The answer from the one and only Ron:

http://allaboutbeer.com/whats-the-difference-between-porter-and-stout/

For the third time in the hope that people might start reading it.

 

[cmac62]

Just in case there is any confusion porter is on the left and stout is on the right. That should clear everything up.
View attachment 657275

Exactly.

 

[cmac62]

The answer from the one and only Ron:

http://allaboutbeer.com/whats-the-difference-between-porter-and-stout/

For the third time in the hope that people might start reading it.

That is a great read. Thanks for the link.

 

[WiSilverBrewer]

So, what we have learned from this exercise is that there are many many stories about everything beer, everyone has the story they believe and it will never agree with the next guy that chimes in. This is one of the things that makes Beer history and lore so interesting, thought provoking and fun. On a homebrew basis, stout and porter are what you decide them to be. So brew your beer, call it what you want and drink it up knowing this is the best damn hobby in the world.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

When Guinness took the manly adjective "stout" and used it to describe a bland and only mildly alcoholic (OK, wimpy) beer they totally abused the word.

 

[Tyler B]

The book "Brewing Porters and Stouts" explores a lot of these supposed histories and more. The author, Terry Foster, has his opinions but basically says there is no clear answer. He then goes on to present historical evidence, mostly focused in and around London about pubs that served different dark and strong beers. He discusses the names of the beers that were served, gravities, ingredients and brewing techniques when possible. Interesting read if you like the styles.

I personally prefer the stronger and/or sweeter stouts. Imperial Stouts are far and away my favorite style. In contrast, porters almost always seem to be lacking something to me. Maybe it's the roasted barley? They usually seem like an amber ale disguised as a stout and leave me a bit disappointed. Not a big fan of dry stouts either.

 

[the_bird]

Did somebody just "like" a post I made twelve ****ing years ago?

The real answer, the difference between the styles; no one knows, no one cares. The origin stories are almost certainly made-up nonsense.

 

[Qhrumphf]

Did somebody just "like" a post I made twelve ****ing years ago?

The real answer, the difference between the styles; no one knows, no one cares. The origin stories are almost certainly made-up nonsense.

I award you one additional ZombieNecroLike (TM).

 

[dlettow]

Did somebody just "like" a post I made twelve ****ing years ago?

I highly doubt the like feature existed in 2007 (Facebook didn't release and popularize the concept until 2009). They were waiting this whole time to get the opportunity.

 

[Gozie Boy]

The book "Brewing Porters and Stouts" explores a lot of these supposed histories and more. The author, Terry Foster, has his opinions but basically says there is no clear answer. He then goes on to present historical evidence, mostly focused in and around London about pubs that served different dark and strong beers. He discusses the names of the beers that were served, gravities, ingredients and brewing techniques when possible. Interesting read if you like the styles.

I personally prefer the stronger and/or sweeter stouts. Imperial Stouts are far and away my favorite style. In contrast, porters almost always seem to be lacking something to me. Maybe it's the roasted barley? They usually seem like an amber ale disguised as a stout and leave me a bit disappointed. Not a big fan of dry stouts either.

Maybe you feel something is missing in the porters because you are anticipating (consciously or sub-consciously) a strong stout when you are tasting it...

 

[Tyler B]

You're probably right. I usually feel the same about most small and dry stouts too.

 

[soccerdad]

The answer from the one and only Ron:

http://allaboutbeer.com/whats-the-difference-between-porter-and-stout/

For the third time in the hope that people might start reading it.

"London was the only mid 18th century city in Europe that could support industrial beer production." ... certainly no Austrian, German or Czech will ever dispute that point ;-)

 

[Miraculix]

"London was the only mid 18th century city in Europe that could support industrial beer production." ... certainly no Austrian, German or Czech will ever dispute that point ;-)

I don't know, but as this guy usually does his homework, I am tending to believe him. Remeber that he is talking about industrial scale. My guess is that in Germany and other beer drinking areas, beer production was more spread and localized, meaning many smaller breweries serving the customers which would not fall into his definition of industrial scale. During those times, it was also far more common to brew your own, so you essentailly need a huge amount of people who want to drink, cannot or do not want to brew on their own and live close by so that transportation is not an issue. That's quite a special surrounding if you ask me, don't know if other cities than back in the day London would match this.

 

[Hanglow]

London would have been five to ten times the size of any czech, german or austrian city in the mid 18th century. And while the british empire was not in full industrial flow by then, it was at that point rising to be the dominant one

 

[soccerdad]

Yeah - I read once that London was the first city to reach 500,000 population, but I don't recall when that was. But some of the German breweries date back to the 1200's, so 'commercial' brewing would have been going on well ahead of mid 18th even if it wasn't 'industrial'.